Israel backs US-Iran ceasefire but Netanyahu’s war goals remain unfulfilled

Israel backs US-Iran ceasefire but Netanyahu’s war goals remain unfulfilled

In late February, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched the joint US-Israeli military campaign against Iran with confidence. However, the tone of his office’s statement confirming the ceasefire that began overnight was more reserved, highlighting that the agreement was primarily driven by President Donald Trump. This contrasted sharply with the triumphant declarations from both the US and Iran, each touting significant achievements after five weeks of conflict.

Netanyahu’s remarks on Wednesday night underscored that the truce was not definitive. He emphasized Israel’s ongoing pursuit of further objectives, either through negotiation or by resuming combat. What remains of Israel’s strategic position following the conflict? At the outset, Netanyahu stated the campaign’s aim was to “eliminate the threat from the Ayatollah regime in Iran” and that “this operation will continue as long as necessary.” Yet, these targets have not been realized: Iran’s military persists, its leadership remains intact, though key figures such as Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei have been eliminated via US-Israeli strikes.

Netanyahu appears to have overestimated the combined capability of Israel and the US to dismantle Iran’s forces and alter its governance structure.

Anshel Pfeffer, a veteran Israeli journalist and biographer of Netanyahu, noted that the prime minister had only described the ceasefire as a “suspension” of hostilities, rather than a definitive end. He argued that Netanyahu’s unmet objectives were “not good” for his political standing and raised concerns about a possible “rift” with the Americans if Israel felt sidelined in the agreement.

There had “never been such a political disaster in our entire history,” Lapid remarked, criticizing Netanyahu’s leadership for failing to secure strategic or political victories.

Yair Lapid, head of Israel’s opposition, called the outcome a “political disaster,” stating that Israel was excluded from critical security decisions. He claimed the military performed admirably and civilians showed remarkable endurance, but Netanyahu’s inability to fulfill his declared aims left him “politically and strategically defeated.”

Shira Efron, an Israel policy expert at the US-based RAND Corporation, acknowledged the campaign’s achievements in “practical terms.” She noted that Iran’s nuclear and missile production facilities were heavily targeted, and its military leadership was “decimated.” However, she pointed out that “wishful goals” like regime change or eliminating enriched uranium stockpiles remained elusive, leaving Israelis to grapple with a persistent missile threat and unresolved nuclear concerns.

With an election year approaching, Netanyahu faces the possibility of losing power within months. While his administration succeeded in damaging Iran’s infrastructure, the lack of decisive outcomes has raised questions about its long-term effectiveness. Analysts suggest that the ceasefire, based on Trump’s “10-point proposal,” may be viewed as a strategic win for Tehran, as it reflects the demands of its leadership rather than a complete victory for Israel.