Elections

The United States is once again at war in the Middle East, and most Americans say it isn’t worth the cost.

Al Jazeera’s Josh Rushing asks why the US keeps fighting: oil, a $2.4 trillion defence industry, lobbyists or a political system that rarely holds anyone to account?

Retired General Mark Kimmitt and journalist Spencer Ackerman debate why, and whether voters can end the forever wars.

Contributors:

Mark Kimmitt – Retired US Army brigadier general and former assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs

Spencer Ackerman – Journalist, author and writer of the Forever Wars newsletter

BREAKINGBREAKING,

The official results are due to be published on November 4, more than a week after the vote.

Exit polls following what many pundits and voters have billed as the most pivotal election in Israel’s history indicate no clear winner in the hard-fought contest.

According to exit polls, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s bloc is projected to secure 50 seats, while the bloc led by opposition candidate Gadi Eisenkot is expected to win 52 or 53 seats. Sixty-one seats are needed to form a majority government. Arab parties are projected to collectively win 18 seats.

Polling stations closed at 10pm (20:00 GMT) local time. Preliminary results are expected on Wednesday, followed by a final tally on Friday. The official results are due to be published on November 4, eight days after the vote.

Exit polls are based on interviews with voters immediately after they have cast their ballots. The interviews help project the election’s outcome and have in previous elections tended to anticipate the results closely.

Voter turnout in the Israeli election reached 74.3 percent as of 8pm (18:00 GMT), according to data released by the Central Elections Committee. By comparison, turnout in the 2022 election was 70.63 percent.

Polls predicted a tight race between incumbent Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and leading opposition candidate Gadi Eisenkot, the leader of the Yashar party and a former army chief.

Israel’s Central Elections Committee rejected a request by Netanyahu’s Likud Party to extend voting hours.

The election is the first since Israel launched its genocidal war on Gaza three years ago, following Hamas-led attacks on the country, and is widely seen as a referendum on Netanyahu’s handling of the events on October 7, 2023 and the conflicts that followed.

United States Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr has sparked uproar with comments he has made denying Arab contributions to mathematics, science and literature.

In a high-voltage rant on Monday, the US health secretary said, “There’s five hundred million Arabs in the world. And yet they don’t produce science. They don’t win the Nobel Prize. They don’t win the Fields Prize. They don’t win the Wolf Prize. They don’t produce literature.”

RFK Jr, who has been involved in anti-vaccine campaigns and has promoted a debunked theory linking vaccines to autism, made the comments during a US election campaign event in Grand Rapids, Michigan while supporting Republican nominee Mike Rogers, who is up against Arab-American Democrat nominee Abdul El-Sayed, in a tightly contested battle for Michigan’s Senate seat in next week’s midterm elections.

Critics said the comments were racist, Islamophobic and factually inaccurate, pointing to modern and historic Arab innovation in multiple fields.

Here’s how Arabs have made vital contributions to the human understanding of maths, science and literature through the centuries.

Arab contributions to maths, science and humanities

The period known as the Islamic Golden Age, from around 750 AD to 1258 AD, produced many key Arab contributions to medicine at a time when Europe was said to be in its Dark Ages. During this time, Arabic was the language of science and scholarship.

1st-4th centuries: The numerals 0-9, which originated in ancient India, were adopted by Arab mathematicians who spread them across the world. They displaced Roman numerals as a more advanced number system in mathematics.

8th century: Arab and Persian mathematicians were studying the ancient Indian concept of zero in mathematics in Baghdad, long before the Europeans. The number zero was crucial to the development of mathematics – but was absent from widely used Roman numerals in Europe.

813-833: The Arab mathematician Muḥammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi – one of those studying the number 0 – is often referred to as the “father of algebra” as he was the first to treat the method as a separate mathematical discipline in his work, Al-Jabr. This method provided the first linear and quadratic equations, still used as a core part of mathematical study today.

965-1040: Ibn al-Haytham, known as the “father of modern optics”, explained the role that light entering the eye plays in human vision. He was born in Basra in Iraq, but spent most of his working life in Cairo attending to noble families.

936-1013: Abu al-Qasim al-Zahrawi, called “the father of modern surgery”, was considered the greatest surgeon in the Middle Ages. He wrote a 30-volume encyclopaedia detailing medical practices and designed and illustrated many surgical instruments. Born in Azahara, in Andalusia, he was known as Abulcasis in Europe.

9th century: Fatima al-Fihri founded the University of al-Qarawiyyin in Fez, Morocco. It is often cited as the oldest continually operating university.

1213-1288: Ibn al-Nafis described pulmonary circulation – the process by which blood passes through the lungs – several centuries before Europeans understood it. He wrote more than 110 volumes of work on surgery, ophthalmology and philosophy while working as a chief physician in Egypt.

915-965:  Abu al-Tayyib al-Mutanabbi, regarded as the greatest poet in the Arabic language, was Yemeni and grew up immersed in Bedouin Arabic culture. He wrote in classical Arabic and many of his verses became sayings used in everyday Arabic.

1100-1165: Muhammad al-Idrisi was a geographer known for making the Tabula Rogeriana, one of the most accurate and detailed medieval world maps, and a high point of Islamic geography. He was born in Ceuta in Morocco.

Prize-winning Arabs

In more modern times, RFK Jr’s assertion that Arabs do not win Nobel prizes for science and literature is very far from the truth. Here are some of the highlights:

1960: Nobel Prize for Medicine

Peter Medawar won the Nobel Prize for Medicine for work on for work on acquired immune tolerance, which underpins organ transplantation. He was born in Brazil to a Lebanese father.

1966: The Fields Medal

Michael Atiyah won the Fields Medal, the most prestigious award for mathematics, in 1966. He was born in London to a Lebanese father and Scottish mother. Educated in Egypt, he spent much of his childhood in Cairo and Khartoum.

1988: Nobel Prize for Literature

Egyptian Naguib Mahfouz won the Nobel Prize in Literature for his body of work, including the Cairo Trilogy, which the Swedish Academy said formed “an Arabic narrative art that applies to all mankind”. He is still the only winner of the prize who wrote in Arabic.

1990: Nobel Prize for Chemistry

Elias James Corey won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry for developing retrosynthetic analysis. He is an American of Lebanese descent.

1993: Wolf Prize for Chemistry

Egyptian Ahmed Zewail won the Wolf Prize for Chemistry. The Wolf Prize is an international award which has been presented to living scientists and artists every year in Israel by the Wolf Foundation since 1978.

1999: Nobel Prize for Chemistry

Zewail also won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry for pioneering femtochemistry, which is the study of chemical reactions on extremely short timescales. He also won the Wolf Prize in Chemistry in 1993.

2005: Nobel Peace Prize

Egyptian scientist Mohamed ElBaradei shared his Nobel Prize with the International Atomic Energy Agency, which he led.

2018: Wolf Prize for Chemistry

Omar M Yaghi,  born in Jordan to a Palestinian refugee family, won the Wolf Prize in Chemistry in 2018 for work on metal-organic frameworks. He shared the prize with Japan’s Makoto Fujita. The Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) condemned his acceptance of the award because the prize is awarded by an Israeli foundation.

2023: Nobel Prize for Chemistry

Moungi Bawendi won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry for the discovery and synthesis of quantum dots. He was born in France to a Tunisian father, but based in the US.

2025: Nobel Prize for Chemistry

Yaghi also won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry for developing metal-organic frameworks. These are crystalline materials with large internal cavities that can capture and store gases, harvest water from air, and trap pollutants. He shared the prize with Susumu Kitagawa from Japan and Richard Robson from Australia.

In a post on X, vaccine scientist Peter Hotez of the Texas Medical Center weighed in on historical Arab scholarship, saying, “It was the Arab scientists of the Middle Ages who kept Aristotle, Hippocrates, Galen alive to hand it down in the Renaissance.”

Broadcaster Mehdi Hasan described RFK Jr’s comments as “racist” and, in a post on X, wrote: “One of the men who won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry last year was a Palestinian-American, Omar Yaghi.”

The Council on American-Islamic Relations called for the US health secretary to be removed. It said: “To stand on a public stage as a sitting US cabinet official and dehumanise half a billion people – and millions of Muslim and Christian Arab Americans – with fabricated, white supremacist talking points is utterly disqualifying for public office. His sweeping erasure of Arab contributions to humanity is not only maliciously false, but it also fans the flames of anti-Arab and anti-Muslim hate at a time when communities are already vulnerable to bigoted attacks from other public officials nationwide.”

As Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva celebrated his election victory on Sunday in Sao Paulo, he placed his hand on the head of a man standing beside him and beaming in a green and yellow Brazilian football jersey.

Lula thanked him for his role in the campaign, calling him “our general”.

Andre Janones, a 42-year-old Brazilian congressman who had spent the final weeks of the presidential run-off building a mass online movement to get Lula re-elected, then embraced the president.

“He played an exponential role in this campaign in lifting the morale of our troops every day, morning, noon and night,” Lula told thousands of supporters who packed Paulista Avenue, the city’s main artery.

Just three weeks earlier, the president seemed to be in trouble. He had finished behind his right-wing rival Flavio Bolsonaro after the first round of voting, his campaign struggling to keep up with the right’s powerful social media operation.

Janones, who had also helped coordinate Lula’s digital operation in his run-off against Jair Bolsonaro in 2022, was convinced Lula’s campaign needed a change – and that he could help turn things around.

He posted a video declaring, “We are going to win this election. Lula will be re-elected president of Brazil.”

His plan centred on a WhatsApp channel he had launched months earlier.

Called Exercito do Lula, or “Lula’s Army”, it had about 60,000 followers after the first round.

By election day, Lula’s Army had grown to almost 11 million subscribers, with Janones widely credited with helping Lula stage his comeback.

How Andre Janones built Lula’s WhatsApp army

Janones is a lawyer and congressman who grew up in a working-class family in Minas Gerais. He made a name for himself through his social media commentary during Brazil’s 2018 truckers’ strike and was elected to Congress that year.

In 2022, he dropped his own presidential bid to endorse Lula, joining his run-off campaign.

“At the time, he became widely known for employing tactics similar to those used by Bolsonarism, despite operating on the left,” said Viktor Chagas, a professor at Fluminense Federal University who studies digital politics and online campaigning.

Janones coined the term “cultural Janonism” to describe his approach, which relied on urgent messages, memes and calls for supporters to take action, as well as what Chagas described as the occasional use of negative campaigning and “content of questionable origin”.

But the scale of Lula’s Army in 2026 was unprecedented, Chagas said.

In the video declaring that Lula would win, Janones urged supporters to enlist as “soldiers” by posting saluting emojis and joining his WhatsApp channel, where he assigned them what he called “missions”.

The tasks were simple, from recruiting three friends to sharing campaign videos to promoting hashtags.

They came in a relentless stream of messages from Janones himself, often written in capital letters. Supporters couldn’t reply, but they could forward the messages or react with emojis, often doing so in the tens of thousands.

Chagas described the strategy as a form of “electoral gamification”, with Janones setting targets for supporters to reach together.

For Andre Pagliarini, an assistant professor of history and international studies at Louisiana State University and the author of a book on Lula, the appeal of Janones’s approach was giving people something they could actually do to help Lula win.

“It became an organising platform that grew exponentially because it spoke to a desire that many Lula supporters evidently had to do something tangible to defeat Flavio Bolsonaro,” he said.

How Lula’s campaign changed its message

But the path to victory wasn’t just about mobilising supporters online.

Pagliarini credited the campaign for also finding a more effective way to tell the story of the president’s working-class past.

“The campaign’s mistake in the first round was to present this history as a finished monument, worthy of admiration but distant from the lives of the people it was meant to represent,” he wrote.

After Bolsonaro mocked the president for having nine fingers during the final televised debate, for example, Lula responded by recalling how he lost a finger at 17 while working a night shift at a factory. He then linked his experience to workers injured as a result of employers’ negligence.

“Unlike Flavio, he reminded voters, he knew the world of work because he had lived in it,” said Pagliarini.

After the debate, Janones spread the message online, promoting the hashtag #SomosTodos9Dedos, or “We Are All Nine Fingers”. Supporters shared the slogan, with some posting photographs of their own amputated fingers in solidarity.

Janones had also publicly called for simpler, less polished campaign videos that showed a more relatable side of Lula, drinking coffee, visiting people’s homes and talking to ordinary Brazilians. Around the same time, the campaign started posting more informal, selfie-style videos.

“Lula was looser in his political communication, less mediated,” Pagliarini said.

Did Lula’s WhatsApp army help him win?

It is difficult to establish whether Janones’s digital army actually delivered votes.

“I am not sure there is a way to empirically connect the group to the outcome,” Pagliarini said.

But he believes Janones helped turn the campaign around.

“Janones himself became a kind of character in the campaign, a cheerleading strategist who seemed confident in a plan that had been missing throughout much of the race,” wrote Pagliarini.

Chagas agreed that it was “difficult to imagine the outcome we achieved without Lula’s Army”, adding that the channel brought together left-wing supporters who had previously been scattered across fragmented online communities, and gave them a way to work together.

The challenge now is keeping that momentum going, Chagas said, pointing to the far right’s use of “permanent campaigning”, maintaining the engagement of supporters between elections.

On election night, at least, Janones kept his soldiers busy.

“EVERYONE TO PAULISTA TO CELEBRATE,” he wrote, urging them to gather on Sao Paulo’s Paulista Avenue. “NOW.”

Later, he asked them not to go to sleep, adding that he’d let them go once he got back from the celebrations.

“Then we’ll discuss a few days off for you,” he joked in a message that drew more than 225,000 reactions.

When Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva scored his surprise election victory on Sunday, winning an unprecedented fourth term in office, his supporters were euphoric.

The joy they felt over Lula’s victory has echoed across large parts of the Global South – and could restore some hope to the grouping that has sought to give emerging countries a greater stake on the world stage, the BRICS alliance.

At a time when United States President Donald Trump is seeking to reassert US power and has cast BRICS as a threat to US interests, Lula’s victory in Brazil offers the alliance a measure of political reassurance, experts say.

A win by his rival, Flavio Bolsonaro, could have threatened Brazil’s commitment to the bloc, given his links to Trump and calls to reconsider the country’s role in BRICS.

Instead, Lula’s return gives the grouping one fewer reason to fear a retreat from within – as it continues to help forge a more multipolar future for a world dominated by the US.

As Esmat Zaidan, professor of public policy at Qatar’s Hamad Bin Khalifa University, told Al Jazeera, “The victory of Lula is important to BRICS’ political continuation in the current climate as it seeks to increase the bloc’s role and make it stronger in global governance.”

A spared fracture

It was clear to analysts that Lula’s win would safeguard the continuation of the BRICS alliance, while under Bolsonaro, its future may have floundered.

Lula himself was one of the architects of the bloc when it was founded nearly two decades ago, and has sought to advance its role on the global stage.

According to Zaidan, Bolsonaro’s desire to reconsider Brazil’s participation in BRICS and instead pursue closer alignment with Washington would have weakened the bloc’s political cohesion and potentially slowed cooperation on trade and financial reform.

Bolsonaro had reportedly also promised the US Trade Representative that Brazil’s Pix instant payment system would stay out of non-Western payment schemes, as the US seeks to safeguard global dominance of the dollar, said Imran Khalid, a geostrategic analyst and senior fellow at Foreign Policy in Focus.

“BRICS makes decisions by consensus, so one unwilling founding member can slow everything down from the inside. That was the real risk, more than Brazil walking out,” Khalid told Al Jazeera.

Still, Zaidan cautioned that continuity of the alliance does not amount to total unity within.

“The member countries of BRICS have distinctly different economic interests and geopolitical goals,” he said. “Therefore, while Lula’s victory makes it easier for the BRICS bloc to continue working towards a common agenda, his election did not eliminate these distinct differences.”

Guy Burton, a geopolitical and policy analyst, agreed that the bloc’s differences will remain unchanged with Brazil’s election result.

“BRICS matters because it represents a large share of the world’s population, economy and trade. But it has never really acted as a political unit. Its members are too different,” he said.

“The bloc now includes Iran and the UAE, which sit on opposite sides of the current war. That tells you how limited its cohesion is,” Burton added.

More multipolarity, but not a counterweight to Washington

The apparent relief in the Global South to Lula’s win reflects a broader concern among many emerging economies about their exposure to decisions made in Washington, “particularly regarding trade, tariffs and international economic relations,” said Zaidan.

“For these countries, the issue is not necessarily opposition to the US. It is about having greater room to make independent decisions and avoiding excessive dependence on any single global power,” he said.

Khalid pointed to China and Russia’s support for Lula, with Xi Jinping backing him against outside interference, and the Kremlin praising his work for the BRICS alliance.

“Most of these countries do not want a fight with the United States; they want the freedom to say no to Washington without being punished for it,” he explained.

“A strong Brazil inside BRICS helps protect that freedom.”

Lula has long advocated for a more multipolar international system, in which emerging economies have a stronger voice when it comes to shaping international rules and institutions, added Zaidan.

Burton said even countries and regions beyond the Global South are looking to lessen their reliance on  Washington, including Europe, which is building its own security against Russia and in support of Ukraine.

“So states, whether in the Western camp or not, have accepted that they must pursue their own interests. That means working with whoever they can. We are moving into a genuinely multipolar world,” he said.

Still, BRICS’ diversity and its member states’ varied interests have meant it has never been a coherent counterweight to the West, experts said.

Many in the alliance maintain strong economic and security relationships with the US, said Zaidan.

“I would see Lula’s victory as strengthening the case for strategic autonomy rather than confrontation with Washington,” said the professor.

“BRICS is potentially more effective when it expands the choices available to its members, rather than defining itself simply through opposition to the United States.”

Burton agreed, pointing to Brazil’s changing ties with Trump over the years.

“Russia and China are the obvious US rivals. But India under Modi long had a close relationship with Washington, and with Trump in particular, even if that has weakened recently,” he said.

“Brazil, too, was close to Trump under Jair Bolsonaro, Flavio Bolsonaro’s father, when he was in office.”

Challenging dollar dependence

Among the BRICS’ many ambitions is to promote trade in local currencies rather than the US dollar – and Lula’s victory could provide the political foundation to build on these efforts, said Zaidan, given that Brazil is one of the largest trading economies in the bloc.

Khalid said that after the alliance scrapped the idea of a common BRICS currency at its most recent summit in New Delhi in September, its ambition for trade in local currencies has become far more viable.

“If the [BRICS’ New Development Bank] moves towards its goal of 30 percent of lending in member currencies, and Brazil and China settle more trade in reais and yuan as they agreed in 2023, reliance on the dollar falls step by step, without an open confrontation,” he explained.

But Zaidan said that political will alone is not enough.

“Countries also need reliable payment infrastructure, sufficient currency liquidity, appropriate financial regulations, and businesses willing to use these arrangements,” he said.

For now the dollar reigns supreme in foreign exchange transactions, and there may be no tipping point for another decade or so, Burton said.

Ultimately, though, Lula’s victory could help BRICS move from political discussions towards more practical financial cooperation, while reducing dollar dependence will be “gradual, uneven and driven as much by economic feasibility as by geopolitical ambition”, said Zaidan.

How Washington reacts to this is another variable; Trump’s government sits at the contradiction of wanting to remain the world’s superpower, while also retreating to a more protectionist America-first role, said Burton.

“Developments such as Lula’s re-election will only sharpen the pressures already building in the Global North,” said the expert.

Almost 45 percent of Israelis had cast a ballot by mid-afternoon, but questions have been raised about possible voter suppression in Arab towns.

Almost 45 percent of Israeli voters had cast a ballot by mid-afternoon on Tuesday, according to Israel’s Central Elections Committee, marking the highest election turnout by 2pm (12:00 GMT) in 50 years.

The figure was 6 percent higher than at the same time in the last elections in 2022.

Mitchell Barak, a pollster and former aide to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, told Al Jazeera that voter turnout “is really high and that’s good”.

“I think … it will probably pass its historic peak in ‘73 – when Israel was also involved in a huge war – so draw what conclusion from that you will,” he added.

The election is largely seen as a referendum on Netanyahu’s handling of the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attacks and the wars that followed, the most intense period of combat for Israel since the 1973 surprise military campaign by Egypt and Syria.

“Those numbers are going to help the incumbent parties,” Barak said, “as the 3.25 percent threshold a party needs to get into the Knesset remains, the number of votes you need to meet that threshold increases dramatically.”

Israeli officials noted that several polling stations had faced exceptionally long lines, which were attributed to high voter turnout despite rainy and blustery weather in parts of the country, and a flood warning in some areas.

Arab vote

In a message more than five hours after polls opened, Netanyahu urged supporters to vote, saying turnout was high among his opponents on the left and among Palestinian citizens of Israel, about a fifth of the population.

“We need it to be high too. You all need to stream to the polls,” he said. “This is a fateful moment.”

Netanyahu had repeatedly warned supporters of the prospect of high turnout among Palestinian citizens in Israel ahead of the vote, seeking to mobilise his base under the slogan “the right or Palestine”.

Those voters were casting ballots in “unprecedented” numbers, Palestinian candidate Ahmed Tibi said.

Netanyahu and his main rival Gadi Eisenkot have ruled out partnering with Arab parties, citing a lack of shared values, although some possible scenarios envision them propping up a minority government to ensure Netanyahu is removed from office.

Meanwhile, an Israeli rights group has filed a complaint with the country’s election commission warning that widespread delays could be suppressing the vote among Israeli Palestinians.

Though delays could be a result of high voter turnout, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) said in its complaint to the Central Elections Committee that delays had been reported in at least 18 communities. It asked the committee to investigate “whether these delays are deliberate.”

The ACRI also reported “a large presence” of police and National Guard officers at a polling station in the Negev Desert, raising concerns that officers were using crowd control as a pretext to prevent people from entering to vote.

For the majority of Israelis, the general election on October 27 is a choice between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the forces that oppose him, led by former general Gadi Eisenkot. But for the Palestinian citizens of Israel, who make up 20 percent of the population, the upcoming polls present a different dilemma.

As the political mainstream in Israel continues to shift to the far right, Palestinian citizens face growing threats to their political and collective rights. Palestinian communities in Israel experience increased violence, while settlers are encroaching on their boundaries. The recent push to expand policing and militarisation of civilian life is another source of growing anxiety within the Palestinian population.

In this context, the anti-Netanyahu bloc does not seem to offer the prospect of policy reversal or change. Therefore, the question on many Palestinian minds is whether voting in the Israeli elections can make any difference at all.

Recolonisation of 1948 Palestine

Since the Nakba of 1948, the Palestinians who managed to remain in their homes in what was declared as territory of the new State of Israel have had a different fate than the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. In 1952, they were granted Israeli citizenship, and in 1966, the martial law under which they were forced to live was lifted.

Although Palestinian citizens of Israel have the right to vote and participate in politics, citizenship has not shielded them from the broader system of dispossession and attempts to reshape their Palestinian identity and national belonging.

Through land confiscation and the regulation of education and culture, the Israeli state has sought to detach Palestinians from their historical roots and collective past, promoting instead a model of the “Arab Israeli” as a citizen whose identity is separate from its Palestinian and Arab national context.

Formal citizenship has not secured substantive equality for Palestinians as they face discriminatory laws, systemic underfunding of basic services, and political and socioeconomic marginalisation.

Instead of engaging in direct violence towards Palestinian citizens – as it has done in the West Bank and Gaza – the Israeli state has instead “outsourced” brutality to criminal networks.

As a result, Palestinian communities have faced killings, shootings, bombings and arson while Israeli law enforcement has largely ignored the problem. More recently, this problem has escalated, as organised crime groups obtained advanced weapons reportedly stolen from Israeli army stockpiles or smuggled across borders. This growing militarisation of organised crime has claimed hundreds of lives.

In parallel, Israeli settlements next to Palestinian communities have expanded, accompanied by accelerated seizure of land. This process of “recolonisation” began in mixed cities, such as Jaffa and Lydd, where religious-nationalist settler groups started establishing themselves in Palestinian neighbourhoods in 2021.

Since October 2023, this process has accelerated. In August, Israel’s Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich unveiled his party’s plan to “Judaise” the Naqab and northern Israel. He proposes to add one million Jewish residents to the two regions, establishing 40 new settlements and dozens of farms, expanding existing settlements, and creating hundreds of thousands of new housing units.

The idea is to extend the model of territorial control from the occupied West Bank into the Naqab and northern Israel, where Palestinian communities are concentrated.

There are also indications that the policing of Palestinian towns and villages could increasingly fall under the National Guard, established under National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir.

The idea of creating the force was prompted by the May 2021 protests, known as the Dignity Uprising, which spread across Palestinian communities in Lydd, Haifa, Umm al-Fahm, and dozens of other towns and villages.

Ben-Gvir has advocated expanding the state’s capacity to suppress such unrest. Although the National Guard’s precise role and operational framework remain under development, its potential deployment against mass protests raises serious concerns about the right to protest and the protection of democratic freedoms.

The government has strengthened settler security squads and integrated them into a broader security framework, raising concerns about the growing role of armed civilian groups in enforcing control over Palestinian communities.

At the same time, Ben-Gvir has widened access to personal firearms, issuing 300,000 gun licences since taking office.

Together, these measures normalise civilian policing and deepen the militarisation of everyday life, reinforcing the unequal distribution of coercive power in a society structured on the dispossession and subordination of Palestinians.

The Palestinian response

Parties seeking to represent Palestinian citizens of Israel, such as the United Arab List (Ra’am), led by Mansour Abbas, have long argued that parliamentary participation and support for the anti-Netanyahu camp can help remove the far right from power and halt its settler-colonial agenda. But the party’s own track record proves this premise wrong.

Ra’am joined the coalition government formed after the elections in 2021, which excluded Netanyahu, but it failed to bring about fundamental changes in the conditions of Palestinian citizens. The coalition was fragile and often rocked by deep ideological contradictions.

In 2022, Mazen Ghnaim, a member of Ra’am, publicly acknowledged that he could not push through policies that would benefit the Palestinian population, despite his party being part of the ruling coalition and despite promises being made that such policies would be accepted. He also lamented the heavy criticism he faced whenever he was visiting Palestinian communities.

Ra’am’s experience in that coalition illustrated the challenge of sustaining Palestinian political participation in a government whose other constituent parties uphold exclusionary nationalist policies.

The problem, therefore, extends beyond Netanyahu himself: Palestinian support for the anti-Netanyahu camp cannot translate into meaningful policies that challenge the broader structures of discrimination and dispossession Palestinian citizens of Israel face.

Voting may offer a way to slow down this project, but it cannot reverse the deeper transformation taking place within Israeli society. The cultural shift towards fascism extends beyond the government and its political leadership, becoming increasingly embedded in social attitudes and everyday life.

That said, I believe another four years of far-right rule would pose an immediate threat to Palestinian communities and their rights. Therefore, I will vote in Tuesday’s election.

But Palestinians need to recognise that electoral participation must be accompanied by a more radical political response capable of confronting the structures and ideologies driving this transformation. This requires, among other things, reforming the High Follow-Up Committee for Arab Citizens of Israel and rooting it more firmly in Palestinian society through popular committees and grassroots organising.

It also demands a broader commitment to democratisation and de-Zionisation across historic Palestine, as part of a larger political project aimed at building a different future through alternative institutions, mechanisms, and forms of collective action.

Whatever the Israeli state might claim, the fate of the Palestinian citizens of Israel is tied to the fate of the rest of the Palestinian population. That is a realisation that Palestinian political leaders must finally embrace.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

The political party of Senator Flavio Bolsonaro has acknowledged the result of Brazil’s presidential run-off, despite the right-wing candidate pledging to annul the outcome.

On Monday, Valdemar Costa Neto, the leader of the right-wing Liberal Party, issued a statement saying his political group had accepted the outcome of the vote.

Still, he echoed Bolsonaro’s concerns about the circumstances surrounding the election.

“We recognise the presidential election results,” Costa Neto said. “But we believe the issues raised need to be properly clarified.”

On Sunday, Bolsonaro was defeated by left-wing incumbent President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva by a margin of more than 4.4 million votes.

Bolsonaro has yet to formally concede. In a post-election speech, he called the election results “unacceptable”, citing a last-minute extension to voting hours.

“We will take legal action,” he told supporters. “I will request that these elections be annulled.”

An extension to Sunday’s vote had been sought by the campaigns of both candidates — but for different reasons.

Bolsonaro’s camp had pointed to inclement weather that impeded some voters from reaching polling stations. Parts of southern Brazil, considered a right-wing stronghold, had experienced heavy rains on Sunday.

Lula’s campaign, meanwhile, pushed for longer voting hours after it accused some cities of limiting public transportation on election day.

The left-wing leader’s allies framed those reductions in service as an attempt at election interference, aimed at preventing Lula’s working-class base from voting.

Media reports indicated that Pablo Souza, a transportation official in the city of Salvador, was arrested on Sunday over the matter.

In response to the petitions, Supreme Court Justice Cristiano Zanin agreed to extend voting by two hours.

Whereas polls across the country had been slated to close at 5pm Brasilia time (20:00 GMT), Zanin’s order allowed those that had not already closed to remain open until 7pm (22:00 GMT).

Following his loss, Bolsonaro cried foul, saying that the justice’s decision had disadvantaged his voters.

He pointed to Zanin’s relationship with Lula as support: Lula had appointed Zanin to the high court in 2023, and Zanin had formerly served as the left-wing politician’s personal lawyer.

“With a simple stroke of a pen, at the request of a former partner, [Zanin] changed the rules of the game mid-match,” Bolsonaro said in his address on Sunday night.

But experts signalled they were sceptical of Bolsonaro’s claims of malfeasance.

An analysis by Pedro Burgos, a professor at the Brazilian educational institute Insper, found that the extension resulted in 35,000 additional votes across the country, less than 0.03 percent of the total.

That amount was far short of Lula’s 4.4 million vote advantage. The incumbent won more than 64.25 million votes, compared with Bolsonaro’s 59.83 million.

Still, some right-wing allies rallied to Bolsonaro’s support. US President Donald Trump, who has clashed with Lula in the past, told reporters that the vote seemed “rigged”.

“Elections have to be indisputable and it looked very bad to me,” Trump said on Monday. “It looked like another rigged election, frankly.”

Still, Trump stopped short of suggesting that he would get involved on behalf of Bolsonaro, saying instead he “did not take sides” in the election.

Bolsonaro’s refusal to accept his loss has raised concerns about whether he will abide by the democratic process or follow in the footsteps of his father, Jair Bolsonaro, who served as Brazil’s president from 2019 to 2023.

After his defeat to Lula in the 2022 election, the ex-president refused to acknowledge the outcome.

Instead, he and his allies sought to overturn the results, including through a legal challenge, and prosecutors accused him of plotting a coup to prevent the legal transfer of power.

Jair Bolsonaro is currently serving a 27-year prison sentence on coup-related charges.

Separately, he was also barred from serving in public office for eight years, after a court found he had misused his public office to spread misinformation about the election.

Flavio Bolsonaro, along with his siblings, has sought to have his father released. The family has denounced the elder Bolsonaro’s trial as a case of political persecution.

Still, it is unclear whether Flavio Bolsonaro will continue with his legal challenge over Sunday’s election.

The Brazilian news outlet Folha de S Paulo reported on Monday that legal advisers and political allies have convinced Bolsonaro to abandon his quest to have his loss annulled, citing the large margin of Lula’s victory and its validation by the Supreme Court and election authorities.

Bolsonaro also announced on Monday that federal police asked him to hand over his passports amid speculation that he could leave the country following his loss.

He said that he would comply with the order and had no plans to leave.

“To withstand the chaos, I’m going to organise the opposition,” the right-wing politician said.

Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva delivered a defiant message after being declared the winner of a run-off vote on Sunday.

He lost round one to his right-wing rival. But he made history by coming out on top in the second poll.

Opponent Flavio Bolsonaro has disputed the result and says he wants it annulled.

This will be Lula’s fourth nonconsecutive term in office. He’s promised a new approach to governing. But many challenges lie ahead. So, how will his government handle them?

Presenter: James Bays

Guests:

Thiago Vidal – Political risk specialist and the director of Political Analysis at Prospectiva Public Affairs

Robert Valencia – Latin American affairs analyst and a former journalist

Graziella Testa – Professor of Political Science at the Federal University of Parana

The Democratic candidate for the US Senate has been the subject of Islamophobic attacks from Trump.

Detroit, Michigan – Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed has dismissed United States President Donald Trump’s anti-Muslim attacks against him, saying that they are an attempt to move the attention away from the president’s own record.

At a news conference in Detroit on Monday, El-Sayed said Trump is trying to distract from issues that matter to Americans – including petrol prices and the war on Iran – by accusing the Democratic candidate of being a “jihadist”.

El-Sayed called the attacks “deflections and deceptions based on no evidence”.

“They have nothing to say about solving the problems in your life. They’re not talking about you,” the Democratic candidate said of Republicans.

“They’re not talking about your gas or your groceries … They’re not talking about clean air or clean water. They’re not talking about any of the things that the government is actually supposed to solve. Why? Because Donald Trump has created those problems.”

At a rally in Michigan on Sunday, Trump unleashed repeated baseless claims against El-Sayed, accusing the Democrat of wanting to impose “Sharia law” on the country.

“He would be the only senator that will have to go through a metal detector before he’s allowed to go into the Senate,” Trump said. “I want him to have a metal detector.”

El-Sayed laughed off the suggestion that he may personally be a physical threat to Congress. “He knows I got those Wolverine claws,” he said, a reference to the sports teams of his alma mater, the University of Michigan.

The progressive Democrat and former public health official is locked in a close race with former Republican Congressman Mike Rogers, a contest that could decide the Senate majority for the next two years.

Rogers has made unfounded allegations linking El-Sayed to the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and Hezbollah a central point of his campaign.

On Monday, El-Sayed said most Americans reject such attacks.

“There are always a few small people who want to make America small like that. You see them; they’re very loud, and they bark,” El-Sayed said.

“The vast majority of folks in this state believe in a big America. They’re open-minded. They’re big-hearted. And the story of America is those who believe in big America, overcoming the deception, the distraction, the sad attempts of the small-minded to make us small.”

He added that “Michiganders are a lot bigger than that”.

El-Sayed also addressed Trump’s statements mocking his name and misrepresenting it as “Mohamed”.

“My name and my faith are not the reason you can’t afford your gas – not the reason you can’t afford your groceries, not the reason you can’t pay your rent, your mortgage, not the reason you can’t see a doctor,” he said.

Investors react to Lula’s election victory with a sharp decline in the Brazilian real and concerns over increased spending and fiscal challenges.

Brazil’s real dropped against the United States dollar on the heels of Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s unexpected re-election after right-wing Flavio Bolsonaro, the son of former President Jair Bolsonaro, led in the first round of voting earlier this month.

Brazil’s currency dropped against the dollar by 12 percent in spot trading. Bovespa stock index futures tumbled nearly 15 percent on Monday.

“I’m not surprised the real is sinking sharply; traders are covering their bets that assume a Bolsonaro victory and tighter fiscal policy,” Rachel Ziemba, adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, told Al Jazeera.

Brazil’s stock exchange halted trading for 30 minutes. The Bovespa index fell 10 percent from its previous close, triggering a circuit-breaker safety mechanism and reversing a rally earlier this month amid expectations of a shift to the right after Bolsonaro won the first round.

Ziemba says Bolsonaro’s refusal to concede the election has driven some financial uncertainty.

“The market pressure is also amplified by the objections raised by Bolsonaro, but the scale of the victory suggests that the result will stand,” she said.

Interest rate futures had also reflected expectations that tighter fiscal policy under Bolsonaro would allow borrowing costs to decline.

“They [investors] assume more domestic spending and higher rates in Brazil. However, the real is still likely to be supported by strong commodity revenues,” Ziemba noted.

Stocks closed on Friday almost 7 percent above their level before the first round, while the Brazilian real was nearly 5 percent stronger against the US dollar.

Interest rate futures are up 3.1 percent, rising sharply after President Lula’s win. Interest rate futures had previously reflected a tighter fiscal policy amid expectations that Bolsonaro would oust the incumbent and that he would allow borrowing costs to decline.

Lula faces an increase in Brazil’s debt and will be challenged with protecting both social programmes and investment, with investors looking for signs of whether his gradual fiscal approach can bring borrowing costs down.

Lula’s team aims to produce a budget surplus of about 1.3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2030. That would leave money to cover part of the interest bill, reducing the need for fresh borrowing. But public debt already exceeds 82 percent of GDP, while pensions and other legally required spending limit where savings can come from.

“Lula’s policies have talked about spending cuts, but he has not gone into the details of how that is going to look,” said Divya Singaravelu, head of research at Meridian 1305 Capital.

Attention will now turn to Lula’s choice of finance minister and what it signals about his fiscal approach.

EXPLAINER

Uncertainty remains over key positions after student-led movement deals blow to longtime leader’s political dominance.

A student-led opposition movement has emerged victorious in Serbia’s snap parliamentary election, ending former President Aleksandar Vucic’s long grip on power.

The Student List’s win on Sunday followed nearly two years of youth-led protests triggered by the death of 16 people in a railway station canopy collapse in the city of Novi Sad in 2024.

Demonstrations demanding accountability quickly evolved into a wider political campaign against alleged corruption and capture of democratic institutions. In its electoral programme presented in September, the Student List said fighting corruption and organised crime were among its main priorities. It also pledged to raise living standards, boost employment, improve education, ensure media freedom and the independence of Serbia’s institutions.

After declaring victory on Sunday, the movement also said it would work to improve relations with neighbouring countries following a period of tension during Vucic’s more than decade-long rule.

Here’s what you should know:

What are the latest results?

The Republic Election Commission (RIK) announced on Monday that the Student List had won 52.54 percent of the vote, based on 8,077 processed polling stations out of 8,392.

The figures also showed the United Serbia list, led by Vucic’s Serbian Progressive Party, had secured 39.29 percent of ballots cast.

Voter turnout stood at 68.78 percent, a record high in more than 30 years, according to RIK data on Sunday.

What’s next?

While the final election result is not yet known, the figures mean that the Student List will be able to form a majority in Serbia’s 250-seat parliament on its own.

The bloc is projected to win 140 seats, well ahead of the 126 mandates required for a majority, while United Serbia is expected to have 103.

The remaining seats are set to go to the Alliance of Vojvodina Hungarians (three); the Albanian political bloc (two); and the Rasim Ljajc-Ljudski and SDA Sandzak lists, with one each.

Who could be the new prime minister?

Unlike United Serbia, which named Vucic as its candidate for prime minister before the election, the Student List made no such announcement during the campaign.

Since its formal creation, the list has avoided highlighting single candidates, eager to emphasise the collective nature of the movement that brought together academics, doctors and workers.

During the campaign, the movement was led by Ilija Srdanovic, a professor at the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Novi Sad. The cardiologist is now seen as the most likely candidate to become the next prime minister, but it remains unclear who will take over key ministries, including those of internal affairs, finance and justice.

When will the new government be formed?

This depends on when the final election results will be announced and when parliament convenes.

The new National Assembly must be established within 30 days of the final results being announced.

A government must be formed within 90 days after that – but the Student List’s clear majority removes the need for lengthy coalition talks.

What about the president?

Vucic has dominated Serbia’s politics – first as prime minister and then as president – since 2014.

Following his call for the snap parliamentary vote last month and his resignation as president, the post has been held temporarily by Ana Brnabic, the president of the National Assembly.

Brnabic is obliged to call for an extraordinary presidential election which must be held no later than three months after the end of Vucic’s mandate.

Vucic resigned on September 27 , so the deadline to hold a vote is December 27 .

The president of Serbia is elected directly by the citizens, not by the representatives in the assembly, but the post is largely ceremonial.

At 80, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has pulled off an extraordinary political victory. After losing the first round to Flavio Bolsonaro, son of former President Jair Bolsonaro, by 47 percent to 45 percent, Lula defied the odds to secure a stunning second-round victory, with 51.8 percent of the vote against Bolsonaro’s 48.2 percent.

His triumph confounded every pre-election poll and crowned a dramatic campaign revival that few had anticipated.

Lula’s victory in Latin America’s largest country does more than halt the far right’s return to power in Brazil. It breaks a succession of right-wing electoral victories across the region and deals a major blow to United States President Donald Trump’s increasingly interventionist agenda in the Western Hemisphere.

When Bolsonaro unexpectedly defeated Lula in the first round, the result sent shockwaves across Brazil and beyond. For the government, the defeat was particularly startling given its strong socioeconomic record. What followed was an extraordinary three-week political mobilisation that transformed the sluggish first-round campaign of Lula’s Workers’ Party into an existential confrontation over the future of democracy and sovereignty in Brazil.

The economic record was hardly that of a government heading for defeat. Brazil’s economy grew by a cumulative 9.2 percent between 2023 and 2025, compared with an average of just 5.6 percent among its South American neighbours. Unemployment fell from 9.3 percent in 2022 to a historic low of 5.4 percent in 2026.

Brazil also exited the United Nations Hunger Map in 2025, after having returned to it under the Bolsonaro senior administration. In the Amazon, deforestation fell to its lowest level in decades, a sharp reversal of the trend under his predecessor.

Not everything has been rosy under the Lula administration. Millions of Brazilians have remained trapped in credit-card debt, struggling with extremely high interest rates, while an explosion of online gambling has devastated the livelihoods of families. The run-off result sent a clear signal that there was social discontent.

Lula responded with unusually bold measures: a sweeping debt-relief initiative and restrictions on online betting, as well as expanded social benefits, fuel subsidies, and the transition from a six-day to a five-day working week. These policies sought to reconnect the government’s macroeconomic achievements with the everyday economic anxieties of Brazilian voters.

Bolsonaro offered a radically different vision for Brazil: sweeping spending cuts, privatisations, lower taxes and, above all, an iron-fisted response to crime and insecurity. His proposals included building five maximum-security prisons modelled on El Salvador’s notorious penitentiary system and authorising lethal force against heavily armed criminals.

Bolsonaro also pledged to pardon his father, sentenced to 27 years for plotting to overturn the 2022 election, and to grant clemency to those convicted over the January 8, 2023 assault on Brazil’s democratic institutions. For his supporters, this represented an opportunity to reverse what they considered judicial persecution. For his opponents, it threatened to rehabilitate the attempted coup and undermine judicial independence.

Lula’s campaign came back re-energised, with many young Brazilians mobilising at the grassroots level. The campaign was able to overcome even algorithmic bias by social media giants like Meta, which favoured Bolsonaro.

Ultimately, the election became a battle not only over Brazil’s democracy but also its sovereignty. Trump’s administration has intervened conspicuously in Brazilian politics throughout Lula’s term, imposing punitive tariffs, sanctioning a Supreme Court justice involved in Jair Bolsonaro’s prosecution and openly embracing his son’s candidacy.

In May, Trump received Flavio Bolsonaro in the Oval Office. Two days later, Secretary of State Marco Rubio designated Brazil’s two largest crime organisations as foreign terrorist organisations, a measure Flavio had publicly requested.

These designations carry implications extending far beyond electoral politics. They potentially open the door to US military operations on Brazilian territory under Washington’s expanding war on so-called “narcoterrorism”. The world saw how one such foreign terrorist designation enabled the US to intervene militarily in Venezuela and abduct its sitting president.

Whereas Trump seeks to draw Latin America’s largest country into Washington’s expanding system of hemispheric military dominance, Lula has defended Brazil’s strategic autonomy, insisting that cooperation against organised crime must respect national sovereignty.

He framed the election as a choice between a sovereign Brazil charting its own course and one subordinated to Washington’s geopolitical agenda. Sunday’s election result shows that the Brazilian people have made their choice.

Importantly, Lula’s victory may mark a turning point in Latin America’s rightward shift. Since Trump’s return to the White House, the right has scored a string of electoral victories in Honduras, Chile, and Bolivia, among others. But Lula’s re-election suggests that its momentum may be faltering.

The result comes just ahead of the US midterms and could deliver a significant setback to the strength of Trump’s leadership in the Americas. In Argentina, President Javier Milei — who regularly attacks Lula and threw all his weight behind Bolsonaro — has been sliding in the polls ahead of next year’s presidential election. In Chile, President Jose Antonio Kast has suffered an even more precipitous collapse in public support.

Mexico’s Claudia Sheinbaum, for her part, has likely breathed a sigh of relief. A Lula defeat would have left her increasingly isolated in a region gravitating towards Mexico’s northern neighbour. Instead, Latin America’s two most populous countries and largest economies will remain firmly on the left for the foreseeable future.

It is too early to declare the region’s rightward turn over. But Lula’s victory raises the possibility that the wave has already crested. Brazil will not be joining Trump’s Shield of the Americas, and while the “Donroe Doctrine” remains a threat, its moment of greatest ascendancy may already be behind it.

Lula’s victory is a vindication of a lifetime spent fighting for society’s most marginalised and disenfranchised. And its significance extends far beyond Brazil’s borders. For defenders of democracy, multilateralism, international law, environmental protection and the sovereignty of the Global South, it sends a powerful message: the far right’s advance is neither inevitable nor irreversible. Not in Brazil. Not anywhere.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Deir el-Balah, Gaza Strip — After three years of genocidal war, Palestinians in Gaza are watching the upcoming elections in Israel with a mixture of fear and uncertainty.

Although the territory has been under a “ceasefire” since October 2025, Palestinians in Gaza continue to endure almost daily Israeli air strikes, dire living conditions, and a punishing siege that has caused shortages of basic goods.

Israelis will head to the polls on Tuesday to vote for their next government, in an election that has been shaped by the war on Gaza. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been strongly criticised for his handling of security before the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led attacks on Israel. Members of his far-right government have called for a tougher line on Gaza, including the expulsion of its population.

The people of Gaza know this election will shape their future and many have been closely watching the campaign.

Mohammed Eliyan, 36, was displaced from Jabalia refugee camp in northern Gaza and now lives in Deir el-Balah with his five children. He hopes a change in leadership in Israel could bring relief to Palestinians who have endured repeated displacement and war.

“We follow the Israeli election to see who will win in the next phase. We hope there might be some easing for the Palestinian cause and for us, who have been displaced again,” he told Al Jazeera.

Eliyan hopes that Gadi Eisenkot, the former Israeli military commander and Netanyahu’s main rival, will defeat the prime minister. He sees Netanyahu as more hardline and fears that if his Likud party and far-right allies win another term, it would mean more war and further displacement for Gaza’s people.

“We hope there will be changes after the election, and that someone other than Benjamin Netanyahu will win. What Netanyahu has done to the Palestinian people, before and after October 7, has not been a small thing,” he said.

But regardless of who wins, Eliyan does not expect a major shift in Israeli policy.

“They are still our enemy, and I don’t expect things to improve dramatically,” he said. “But we hope someone else might be less harsh than Netanyahu.”

He called on Israel’s next leader to end the war, prevent displacement and starvation, and ease restrictions at Gaza’s crossings.

“We want whoever leads Israel not to be hardline. End the war and let us live in peace,” he said.

Islam Salem, 41, is displaced from Beit Lahiya in northern Gaza and has three daughters. He is following Israel’s election closely and believes the result could affect Gaza’s future and the lives of his children, likely for the worse.

“Politics is our livelihood. It is connected to everything in our lives, our living conditions and even the future of our children,” he said.

But he also believes that elections primarily serve Israeli interests, so even if there are new faces in the next government, the Gaza strategy will likely remain the same.

“Israeli policy will not change in any way. Whatever they take, they consider it theirs and a political gain for them, the gains of a war they have pursued for a long time,” Islam told Al Jazeera.

He pointed to Israel’s continued control of about 65 percent of Gaza’s territory inside the “Yellow Line”. He also doubts whether reconstruction will begin soon in Gaza, where more than 80 percent of buildings have been damaged, and about two-thirds of those have been completely destroyed.

“I think reconstruction will be difficult. They do not want to give others any rights. They want their rights in full, and even more,” he said.

Years of war have left Salem struggling to imagine a future beyond his harsh daily reality.

“There is no future left for us to be afraid of. We live day by day. We have no idea what will happen next, and everything we feared has already happened,” he said.

Asked what he would say to Israel’s next prime minister, he spoke of how many in Gaza are feeling.

“If only a simple person could come and talk to him and say, ‘Leave us alone. Give us some breathing space and let us breathe.’ But he would not be convinced. What can I say to him?” he said.

Hanan Abu al-Maaza, 57, has been displaced more than 12 times during the war on Gaza. She fears Israel’s next government could bring more suffering to its people in the besieged enclave.

“We follow the election because of the fear and anxiety we are living with. We have been displaced more than 12 times, and we are afraid they will do even worse to us than before,” she said.

“We go to sleep without feeling safe, wondering what they might do to us next. The fear is still in our heads and hearts.”

Abu al-Maaza says if Netanyahu is defeated, there will be more chance that she can return to her home in Beit Lahiya.

“I hope someone else wins, so we can have peace of mind and feel safe, and return to our homes. That is what we wish for,” she said.

After years of destruction in Gaza, she hopes Israel’s next leader will show Palestinians more mercy.

“Maybe he will say that there is nothing left in Gaza, that they have done enough and should let people live. There is hardly anything left in Gaza for anyone to think about doing anything more,” she said.

Abu al-Maaza urged Israel’s next leader to end the war and stop the suffering in the territory.

“We have had enough of war and destruction. There is nothing left to destroy, yet the suffering continues,” she said.

Manar Owaida, 23, is originally from northern Gaza and is now displaced in the Tal al-Hawa neighbourhood of Gaza City. She is also keeping an eye on the Israeli election and considering its potential impact.

“I follow the election to know what they are saying and planning, and to understand what is happening around us and how the next Israeli government might affect the situation in Gaza,” she said.

Owaida hopes Gadi Eisenkot will replace Netanyahu, and sees the current prime minister as more extreme than his challenger. But she does not believe a change in Israel’s leadership would transform Palestinian lives, arguing that government policies have remained consistent for decades.

“Israel’s policy is one of crime, killing and destruction. Since 1948, it has been the same policy, the same killing and the same blockade,” she said.

Still, she hopes a new government could ease restrictions and killings and withdraw from areas beyond the “Yellow Line”, allowing life to gradually return to Gaza.

“There might be a change in Israeli policy if someone comes in place of Netanyahu and eases the blockade and the killing we are living through,” she said.

“There could be a withdrawal from the Yellow Line and life could gradually return to Gaza. But we are waiting with fear and uncertainty, alongside a little hope.”

Her greatest concern is that Netanyahu could launch a wider regional war to avoid domestic political pressure around the time of the vote.

Owaida said she wants Israel’s next prime minister to allow Palestinians to live without fear of further violence.

“We want to live in freedom and peace, away from killing and wars,” she said.

Mousa Ali, 33, was displaced from Beit Lahiya in northern Gaza and is now in Gaza City with his four children.

He believes that the outcome of the election could determine whether displaced Palestinians can return to areas beyond the “Yellow Line”.

“For Palestinians, this election is critical, especially because of the Yellow Line. We hope the opposition will be better when it comes to allowing displaced people to return to their areas,” he said.

Ali mentioned Gadi Eisenkot as a possible alternative and hopes Arab parties will perform strongly so they have a role in the next government.

But he does not expect a new leader to bring major changes for the people of Gaza and fears that Israeli attacks will continue. He says a Netanyahu victory would prolong displacement and control over areas around the “Yellow Line”.

“Every day in Gaza, there is blood, there are people being killed, and there is bombing everywhere,” he said. “We hope this policy will end and that a new prime minister will stop this ongoing bloodshed.”

Aleksandar Vucic, who has shaped Serbia’s political life for more than a decade, has lost snap parliamentary elections to a student-led movement that led protests against him for almost two years.

After a heated race, Vucic conceded defeat to the Student List in Sunday’s elections, which saw voter turnout reach its highest level in more than 30 years.

“It is clear that we have lost these elections,” the leader of the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) told supporters after a sample of votes showed his electoral list was expected to win 105 seats in Serbia’s 250-member parliament, compared with 135 to 140 for the Student List.

The student movement emerged after 16 people were killed when a train station canopy collapsed in the city of Novi Sad on November 1, 2024.

The youth-led protests grew into a broader wave of social unrest and evolved into the Student List political platform, which promised to tackle corruption, depoliticise public institutions and restore citizens’ rights.

During the election campaign, the movement was led by Ilija Srdanovic, a professor at the Faculty of Medicine in Novi Sad.

Vucic referred to the demonstrators, who included university professors, doctors and workers, as “blockaders” and accused them of seeking to destabilise Serbia.

A former ultranationalist, Vucic cultivated an image of a pragmatic leader who maintained ties with the European Union, Russia and China as well as, increasingly, with Israel in recent years.

Born in Belgrade in 1970, the nearly 2-metre-tall (6.5ft-tall) Vucic graduated from the University of Belgrade’s faculty of law. He entered politics in 1993, joining the ultranationalist Serbian Radical Party led by Vojislav Seselj.

His political record during the 1990s was marked by nationalist rhetoric. One of his most remembered statements came in Serbia’s parliament in July 1995, nine days after the Srebrenica genocide: “Kill one Serb, and we will kill 100 Muslims.” Vucic made the comments during a debate on possible NATO strikes against positions held by the Army of Republika Srpska in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Vucic’s political mentor at the time, Seselj, was sentenced in 2018 to 10 years in prison by the Appeals Chamber of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals for persecution, deportation and forcible transfer of non-Serbs during the wars in the Balkans in the 1990s.

Aleksandar Seselj, the son of Vojislav Seselj, was on Vucic’s electoral list in Sunday’s elections.

After a split within the Serbian Radical Party, Vucic and Tomislav Nikolic founded the SNS in 2008. The new party sought to move closer to mainstream European politics.

Safeta Bisevac, a Serbian journalist who has long followed Vucic’s political career, believes he was initially less popular than Nikolic, who appeared closer to common citizens.

“Vucic lagged far behind in popularity at the time and was essentially the organiser of the newly formed party,” Bisevac told Al Jazeera.

In 2012, the SNS came to power promising to fight corruption, organised crime and abuses committed under previous governments.

One of the most prominent cases was the December 2012 arrest of businessman Miroslav Miskovic and his son Marko on suspicion of financial irregularities and tax evasion. After years of legal proceedings, both were acquitted and the state paid them compensation.

Bisevac said the results of the fight against corruption remained modest while the authorities expanded their control over institutions, the media and political life.

Vucic served as first deputy prime minister from 2012 to 2014 before ascending to the post of prime minister in 2014. Three years later, he became president of Serbia and won re-election in 2022. His term was due to run until 2027.

Under pressure from the student-led protests, he resigned in September and called early elections. Although the Serbian presidency is constitutionally limited, Vucic has retained a dominant influence over his party and state policy.

“He made many promises and fulfilled few of them, but in the meantime, he established almost complete control over the state apparatus,” Bisevac said.

Economic growth and the debate over living standards

The Serbian economy has expanded significantly since Vucic took Serbia’s political centre stage in 2012. Unemployment dropped from 26 percent to 8 to 9 percent while nominal gross domestic product nearly tripled, reaching about 90 billion euros ($101bn), according to official data cited by the Reuters news agency.

Annual foreign direct investment inflows rose from about 800 million euros ($896m) in 2012 to a record 5.2 billion euros ($5.8bn) in 2024.

A network of modern motorways has also been built.

However, rising wages have not necessarily translated into a proportional improvement in living standards. The rising cost of living and public debt remain important elements of the debate over the government’s economic record.

Political scientist Dusko Radosavljevic said “the students simply gave a voice to the justified anger of citizens.”

Speaking to Al Jazeera about Vucic’s policies, Radosavljevic said the past decade was characterised by “systematic pressure and the destruction of social institutions”.

“State intelligence services have spent less time on their actual duties and more time monitoring political opponents while critical thinking has been pushed out of the public media,” Radosavljevic said.

Judge questions the Trump administration’s efforts to exert greater influence over elections process ahead of upcoming midterm vote.

A United States appeals court has expressed doubt over the Department of Justice’s lawsuit against California, which seeks to force the state to throw out mail-in ballots it has deemed likely to go to non-citizens.

Circuit Judge Mark Bennett said on Sunday that the three-judge panel would issue a decision as soon as possible, following a rare weekend oral argument.

But Bennett, an appointee of Republican President Donald Trump, voiced concern that the lawsuit would not hold up to scrutiny.

He pointed to the Elections Clause in the US Constitution, which allows states — not the federal government — to administer elections.

“It seems to me that you want us to issue an injunction that is entirely inconsistent with the law that the California legislature has adopted pursuant to the Elections Clause,” Bennett told Justice Department lawyer Matthew Donnelly. “How can we do that?”

The case is part of a larger effort under the right-wing Trump administration to crack down on alleged non-citizen voting ahead of the crucial November 3 midterm elections.

On October 15, less than three weeks before the midterm races, the Justice Department issued a complaint targeting California, a left-wing stronghold.

It asked the federal court system to set aside thousands of mail-in ballots that the government says were sent to “likely non-citizens”.

The lawsuit indicates the Trump administration sent California officials a list of 20,000 names it believes are not eligible to vote, based on citizenship.

Trump has often pushed the discredited claim that the Democratic Party is benefiting from widespread voting by non-citizens.

California has long been one of the targets for his election misinformation.

Earlier this year, Trump denounced the state’s primaries after right-wing candidates like Los Angeles mayoral hopeful Spencer Pratt felt short of his expectations.

“There’s BIG cheating by the Dumocrats in California,” he wrote on social media at the time.

He then announced that the state would be under investigation from the US attorney’s office.

Trump’s efforts have caused alarm, with critics accusing him of seeking to dampen voter turnout through intimidation and confusion.

The midterms will decide which party controls the US Congress, as well as key state and local positions.

Polls, however, predict steep odds for Republican candidates, given Trump’s souring approval ratings and dissatisfaction with issues like the cost of living and the US-Israeli war against Iran.

Voting rights advocates have warned that the Trump administration has not publicly revealed how it has compiled its list of non-citizen voters, and whistleblower reports have cast doubt on the accuracy of such lists.

In response to the October 15 lawsuit, California has countered that it has strong safeguards to prevent non-citizens from voting.

It also said that the Justice Department’s claims are based on dubious data.

“This is a sad, desperate attempt by Trump to use his politicized Justice Department to try to suppress California voters just three weeks before Election Day,” California Governor Gavin Newsom said in a statement earlier this month.

“We will continue to carry out free and fair elections in the Golden State — and call out this authoritarian as he tries every play in the dictator’s playbook.”