In the Gaza Strip, where three years of Israel's genocidal war have devastated Palestinians, expectations surrounding Tuesday's Israeli Knesset elections vary widely.
Some Palestinians hope the vote will bring about the end of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, while others believe that any incoming Israeli government will not differ much from its predecessor.
The anticipation reflects the narrow range of alternatives available to Gaza's Palestinian residents, amid stalled political processes, continuing suffering and the absence of a clear prospect for ending the war and its impact.
While Israelis await the ballot results to determine their next government, Palestinians find themselves closely connected with the outcome, hoping that something might change in their dire reality.
The contradiction is particularly stark given the postponement of Palestinian elections, while Palestinians follow the Israeli vote and await its results as a potential factor in changing conditions in Gaza.
While Palestinian elections are supposed to serve as a means of renewing political legitimacy and determining national priorities, Palestinians find themselves compelled to look towards another electoral contest in search of a possible way to stop the war or alleviate its consequences.
Yet this anticipation does not mean the results will deliver what Palestinians hope for.
A change in the Israeli government may alter some calculations, but it does not guarantee an end to the war, the lifting of restrictions or the launch of a comprehensive reconstruction process in Gaza, unless it is accompanied by actual shifts in policy and international pressure capable of influencing Israeli decisions.
Differing hopes in Gaza
For Palestinian Mohammad Zakaria, who lives in a tent in Deir al-Balah in central Gaza after being displaced from Beit Lahia in the north, the upcoming Israeli elections represent an opportunity he hopes will lead to the downfall of Benjamin Netanyahu's government, which he holds responsible for what Palestinians have endured during the years of genocide.
Zakaria told The New Arab that the departure of the current government could open the door to a different approach towards the Gaza Strip and give residents a chance to escape the reality of killing, destruction and siege, and recover the minimum conditions necessary for life.
However, this hope is not shared by all Palestinians.
Ibrahim Hammad believes the problem extends beyond Netanyahu and his government to the nature of Israeli society and its current political tendencies. He argues that the rise of the right and the growing prevalence of extremist rhetoric make relying solely on a change of government insufficient.
Hammad told TNA that Palestinians have no guarantees that the arrival of a new Israeli government will lead to a genuine change in the policies pursued towards them.
He noted that positions concerning Gaza, the occupied West Bank and displacement cannot be reduced all on Netanyahu as an individual. He also argues that a change in political figures may not alter the substance of these policies, as long as large sections of Israeli society continue to support hardline positions towards Palestinians.
Saeed al-Aila, meanwhile, views the Israeli elections from a different perspective, one linked to the exhaustion and despair experienced by Gaza's residents after years of war.
Al-Aila told TNA that Palestinians being compelled to follow Israeli elections and link their fate to their results reflects the extent of their inability to influence their own circumstances, as well as the absence of a Palestinian political horizon capable of offering solutions or pathways out of the crisis.
"Gaza's residents can't endure further waiting and suffering, at a time when the necessities of life are deteriorating and basic needs are increasing," he said.
"Perhaps the painful irony lies in the postponement of Palestinian elections, while Palestinians await the Israeli elections to find out whether changes will occur in their lives, as if determining their future has become more dependent on the decisions of the Israeli voter than on their own political will."
A consensus that extends beyond Netanyahu
Political writer and analyst Mustafa Ibrahim told TNA that Palestinian hopes pinned on the Israeli election results reflect a state of despair stemming from the absence of a clear political horizon for solutions, amid the continuation of the war and a lack of sufficient indications that it can be ended through existing political channels.
Ibrahim said the elections could produce an Israeli government that is less hardline on certain issues or create greater room for the opposition and sections of Israeli society calling for an end to the war.
However, he stressed that this does not necessarily mean a fundamental change in Israeli policies towards Palestinians.
He emphasised that any genuine shift will require real international pressure to push the Israeli government to stop the war and commit to clear standards for ending it.
He also highlighted the importance of European and international positions, alongside US pressure, in pushing the political process towards tangible results.
According to Ibrahim, the Israeli elections do not appear to be an independent factor capable of changing the Palestinian reality. Rather, they represent one of several variables that could interact with external pressure and broader political positions.
The change Palestinians are waiting for depends not only on the identity of the next prime minister, but also on the willingness of influential parties to impose a different course from the policies that have led to the continuation of the war and the worsening humanitarian crisis.
For his part, Israeli affairs analyst Adel Shadid argues that a change in the Israeli government will not necessarily lead to a fundamental shift in policies towards Palestinians or a tangible improvement in their circumstances, even if different political forces come to power.
Shadid told TNA that Palestinian, Arab and international reliance on the Israeli elections as a gateway to change revealed the absence of alternatives and the tendency to await transformation from within Israeli society, rather than building effective political and international pressure to force Israel to change its policies.
He noted that Netanyahu's re-election could amount to the legitimisation of the continuation of the existing political approach, and potentially even its intensification.
However, the arrival of another premier would not guarantee fundamental change in Israel's treatment of Palestinians and their rights.
Regarding Gaza, Shadid pointed to broad Israeli consensus on several key issues concerning the territory, making expectations of a major shift simply through a change of government uncertain.
He argued that the next government could adopt even harsher policies towards Gaza, even if Netanyahu does not remain prime minister.