JERUSALEM — Benjamin Netanyahu seems poised for reelection as Israel’s prime minister in Tuesday’s voting, the result of the failure of his opponents to unite behind a viable candidate against him — and the fact that most Israelis no longer seem to believe it is possible to reach a peace settlement with the Palestinians.
The widely held assumption of a victory by Netanyahu comes despite his record: There is no peace process, there is growing diplomatic isolation and a slowing economy, and a key ally has been forced to step down as foreign minister because of corruption allegations.
Even so, Netanyahu has managed to convince enough Israelis that he offers a respectable choice by projecting experience, toughness, and great powers of communication in both native Hebrew and flawless American English.
He was also handed a gift by the opposition. Persistent squabbling by main figures divided among main parties in the moderate camp has made this the first election in decades without two clear opposing candidates for prime minister. Even Netanyahu’s opponents have suggested his victory is inevitable.
‘‘His rivals are fragmented,’’ said Yossi Sarid, a dovish former Cabinet minister who writes a column for the Haaretz newspaper. ‘‘He benefits by default,’’ he said.
The confusion and hopelessness that now characterize the issue of peace with the Palestinians have cost the moderates their historical campaign focus.
Many Israelis are disillusioned with the bitter experience of Israel’s unilateral pullout from the Gaza Strip in 2005, which led to years of violence. Others believe Israel’s best possible offers have been made and rejected already, concluding that they cannot meet the Palestinians’ minimal demands.
Former prime minister Ehud Olmert has said that in 2008 he offered the Palestinians roughly 95 percent of the West Bank and additional territory from Israel in a ‘‘land swap.’’ He also said he offered shared control of Jerusalem, including its holy sites. The Palestinians have disputed some of Olmert’s account and suggested they could not close a deal with a leader who was by then a lame duck.
‘‘There can’t be peace because we’ve tried everything already. All the options have been exhausted. They apparently don’t want to make peace,’’ said Eli Tzarfati, a 51-year-old resident of the northern town of Migdal Haemek. ‘‘It doesn’t matter what you give them — it won’t be enough.’’
Tzarfati expressed what seems to be a common sentiment.
A poll conducted last week in Israel by the New Wave Polling Research Institute found that 52 percent of respondents support the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel as part of a peace agreement.
Yet 62 percent said they do not believe the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, is a partner for peace. An identical number said it is not possible to reach an agreement.
In the absence of peace talks, those who wanted to end Israel’s occupation of Palestinian lands once spoke of a unilateral pullout from at least some of the territories. But that idea is moot because of the Gaza pullout, which led to the territory’s takeover by Hamas militants and years of rocket fire into Israel. This situation leaves many Israelis at a loss over what to do next.
Since most of the Palestinians are now living in autonomous zones inside the West Bank and prevented from entering Israel, and violence has largely subsided, the most attractive option to Israelis seems to be ignoring the issue.