Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is caught in a race against time. He originally planned to call an early election due to high approval ratings, but misjudging the situation in Iran makes it highly likely that the early election will fail. On one hand, the war with Iran has become a protracted war with no end in sight, and on the other hand, the deadline for passing the budget on March 31 is fast approaching.

He urgently needs to get the $225 billion military budget implemented, with only one core objective: to avoid an early election that could lead to his defeat.

This military operation, which began with the expectation of "political dividends," has now become a heavy burden dragging down his political fate, plunging Israel's longest-serving prime minister into multiple emergency predicaments.

Election plans backfire: the war has not gone as expected, and an early election poses a "fatal risk."

Netanyahu's political ambitions were closely tied to the war in Iraq.

In the early stages of the war, the US and Israel successfully assassinated Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and several key officials in the first round of strikes. His team was optimistic that they could use this "decisive victory" to create momentum and bring forward the election originally scheduled for October to June, thereby turning the tide of the election with the benefits of the war.

According to Israeli law, if the parliament fails to pass the budget by March 31, it will automatically trigger a snap election within 90 days. This was seen by Netanyahu's camp as a "shortcut" to push for an early election.

But reality has dealt a harsh blow: the war has lasted for nearly four weeks, and there has been no progress toward the core objective of overthrowing the rule of Iranian clerics; the war has become a stalemate.

Even more fatally, the polls did not tilt in his favor as expected—since October 7, 2023, the election support has remained deadlocked at 40% to 40%: about 40% of voters support his nationalist and religious coalition, 40% support the opposition coalition, and the key swing voter group remains unmoved.

A poll by The Times of Israel on March 19th further exacerbated the situation: Netanyahu's Likud party could only secure 28 of the 120 seats in parliament, a significant reduction from the current 34 seats. Even if it remains the largest party in parliament, its coalition government would only have 51 seats, far from a majority.

Polls indicate that he is likely to lose if an early election is triggered, which has caused Netanyahu to shift from "actively seeking an election" to "trying his best to avoid an election."

Budget negotiations are urgent: political compromises in exchange for support lead to a sharp increase in fiscal pressure.

In order to secure the budget and stabilize the ruling base before the deadline, Netanyahu's team launched an emergency mobilization, regarding the passage of the budget as a "political lifeline."

On the one hand, they are pushing the parliamentary finance committee to expedite the review process and strive to complete all procedures before March 31; on the other hand, they are willing to sacrifice targeted funding to transfer benefits to key political allies in exchange for budget support votes.

Among other things, the government allocated approximately 5 billion shekels (US$1.28 billion) specifically to schools controlled by the ultra-Orthodox Jewish political party that had threatened to veto the budget, ultimately securing its support.

This $225 billion budget is primarily focused on the ongoing commitment to the war in Iraq—the war has already caused Israel's economy to lose approximately 5 billion shekels (US$1.6 billion) per week in direct losses, and since the start of the military operation, additional security spending has totaled 32 billion shekels, with these huge expenditures continuously depleting the country's fiscal reserves.

However, this approach of "sacrificing the fair distribution of resources to preserve power" has sparked widespread controversy. Opposition member Vladimir Belyak bluntly criticized the government for "putting the survival of the coalition government above the fair distribution of resources," while the market is even more concerned that this politically compromised fiscal allocation will weaken the credibility of Israel's economic governance, further impact the shekel exchange rate and asset market stability, and exacerbate the risk of a widening fiscal deficit.

The stalemate in the war has added fuel to the fire: rising public discontent and unfulfilled objectives create a complex web of pressures.

Netanyahu's "anxiety" stems essentially from the complete loss of control over the war in Iraq.

He had hoped that the war would shift public attention from the Gaza issue to the action against Iraq to "eliminate the threat to survival"—an issue that initially received widespread support from the Israeli people. However, as the war dragged on without any decisive results or diplomatic reconciliation, public anti-war sentiment continued to rise.

Gideon Rahat, a political scientist at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, aptly points out the dilemma: "After one round of conflict comes several months of calm, followed by a new round of confrontation," and this cycle causes voters to lose confidence in the government's ability to govern security.

Even more serious is the increasing pressure from international opposition. A poll on March 19 showed that 59% of Americans disapproved of a large-scale military operation by the US and Israel against Iran, and about one-fifth of Republicans also explicitly opposed it. 55% of those surveyed refused to support any scale of ground war. The divisions within the allies have isolated Israel's military action.

The ongoing conflict has failed to bring any political gains, instead leaving Netanyahu in a dilemma of "unable to win and unable to retreat": escalating the conflict would further deplete national resources and intensify public resentment, while withdrawing would mean the complete failure of his political goals and make it even more difficult to reverse his electoral decline.

Legal risks compounded: Pardon application blocked, political uncertainty soared.

As if things weren't bad enough, the ongoing legal turmoil has made Netanyahu's situation even more precarious.

He is facing a six-year corruption trial, charged with fraud, bribery, and abuse of trust. Although he has consistently denied the charges, the ongoing trial has severely damaged his political image.

In an effort to protect himself, Netanyahu, with the support of US President Trump, has formally submitted a pardon application to Israeli President Isaac Herzog, and even attempted to secure an "unprecedented pardon" during the trial. However, this request has been explicitly opposed by the Israeli judicial system, and the presidential palace has also admitted that it is an "unusual request with significant implications."

The intertwining of legal risks and political crises has fueled a continued rise in market risk aversion.

Investors are concerned that if Netanyahu loses the election or is removed from office by legal judgment, Israel's war policy toward Iraq and fiscal budget planning may face drastic adjustments, and the uncertainty of policy continuity will further suppress the attractiveness of asset markets.

For Netanyahu, this “triple emergency battle” involving elections, budget, and war is a matter of political life and death at every step, yet every step is fraught with difficulty—the deadline for budget passage is fast approaching, the stalemate in the war is hard to break, and the decline in the polls has not been reversed. Whether this rapid march can reach its destination remains to be seen.