Israel backs US-Iran ceasefire but Netanyahu’s war goals remain unfulfilled
Israel Backs US-Iran Ceasefire, Yet Netanyahu’s Objectives Remain Unmet
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu initially expressed confidence when he launched the joint US-Israeli military operation against Iran in late February. However, the recent ceasefire announcement marked a shift in his public stance, with his office adopting a more reserved tone. The decision was attributed to President Donald Trump, contrasting sharply with the assertive declarations from both the United States and Iran, which framed the conflict as a significant achievement. Despite this, Netanyahu emphasized that the truce was not a conclusion but a temporary pause, signaling Israel’s ongoing pursuit of further objectives.
The war’s conclusion left Israel and its leader with unmet targets. Netanyahu had asserted that the mission aimed to “eliminate the threat from the Ayatollah regime” and that “the operation would continue as long as necessary.” Yet, Iran’s military forces remain active, and its clerical leadership, though diminished by targeted strikes, still holds power. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and key officials were eliminated, but the nuclear program and stockpile of enriched uranium persist. Additionally, Iran’s missile arsenal, though weakened, has continued to target Israel, with multiple attacks reported in Jerusalem overnight following the ceasefire.
Israeli Perspectives on the Ceasefire
Analysts suggest Netanyahu may have overestimated the operation’s ability to dismantle Iran’s regime. Anshel Pfeffer, a seasoned Israeli journalist and author, noted that the prime minister described the ceasefire as a “suspension” of hostilities, implying a strategic pause rather than a definitive end. Pfeffer argued that Netanyahu’s failure to secure regime change could strain relations with the US, as the agreement was reached without sufficient Israeli input. This has raised concerns about the alignment of objectives between Trump and Netanyahu, particularly given the US leader’s reference to Iran’s “10-point proposal” as the basis for the truce.
“The army did everything they asked of it, the public displayed incredible resilience, but Netanyahu failed politically, failed strategically, and did not meet any of the goals he himself set.”
Yair Lapid, head of Israel’s opposition, called the outcome a “political disaster,” citing the absence of Israeli involvement in critical security decisions. He criticized Netanyahu for failing to achieve the stated goal of ending Iran’s existential threat. Shira Efron, an expert at the RAND Corporation, echoed this sentiment, noting that Netanyahu had promised the campaign would “remove the Islamic regime,” but the missile program and nuclear stockpile remain intact. She observed that, for many Israelis, the war’s impact on their safety was negligible despite the destruction of key facilities.
Conversely, Yossi Kuperwasser, a former military intelligence official and JISS director, highlighted that “practical achievable goals” had been met. He argued that Iran’s nuclear and missile infrastructure had been significantly damaged, and its leadership “decimated.” However, he acknowledged that unattainable aspirations, such as regime collapse, were overemphasized and not guaranteed. With Israel’s election season underway, Netanyahu’s political fortunes now hang in the balance, as his strategic vision appears unfulfilled.
