Israel Supports US-Iran Ceasefire, Yet Netanyahu’s Strategic Ambitions Remain Unmet
In late February, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched a joint military effort with the United States against Iran, expressing confidence in the operation’s outcome. However, the Israeli government’s response to the ceasefire announcement was subdued, highlighting that President Trump had ultimately decided to halt hostilities. This contrasted sharply with the celebratory declarations from both the US and Iran, which framed the conflict as a significant victory after five weeks of hostilities.
Netanyahu acknowledged the operation as a success but emphasized that the ceasefire marked only a temporary pause, with Israel still pursuing additional objectives. While Iran’s armed forces continue to operate and its clerical leadership remains in power, key figures such as Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei have been eliminated through strikes. The nuclear program and stockpile of enriched uranium remain unresolved, and Iranian missile barrages toward Israel persisted throughout the war. Missile alerts and explosions were reported in Jerusalem overnight, even after Trump’s deal was announced, with the Israel Defense Forces confirming multiple projectiles launched from Iran.
The Ceasefire’s Impact on Israel’s Objectives
Despite the ceasefire, Iran’s military capabilities and leadership have been severely weakened, though the regime’s structure remains intact. Anshel Pfeffer, a veteran Israeli journalist and biographer of Netanyahu, noted that the prime minister had only referred to a “suspension” of hostilities, rather than a full cessation, and had not publicly accepted the war’s conclusion. This hesitancy suggests Netanyahu’s goals were not entirely realized, raising concerns for his political standing.
“Netanyahu’s failure to achieve his stated objectives is not good for him,” said Pfeffer, adding that a potential rift with the Americans could emerge if the ceasefire was reached without Israeli input. “Until now, there were public displays of unity, but their goals might no longer fully align.”
Yair Lapid, opposition leader in Israel, called the situation a “political disaster in our entire history,” stating that Israel was not involved in critical security decisions. “The army did everything they were asked, the public showed incredible resilience, but Netanyahu failed politically and strategically,” he argued. With an election year underway, Netanyahu faces the risk of losing power within months.
Expert Perspectives on Netanyahu’s Campaign
Shira Efron, an Israeli policy analyst at RAND, explained that the campaign was framed as a means to end the Islamic regime’s threat, yet the war only damaged its infrastructure. “The snake turned into a hydra,” she said, noting that the missile program still exists and that the public saw little difference in Iran’s capabilities despite attacks on its facilities.
“Netanyahu promised Israelis the campaign would remove an existential threat, but the snake remains,” Efron added. “There was no regime change, and the Iranians still hold enriched uranium.”
Yossi Kuperwasser, former military intelligence officer and director of the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security, distinguished between practical and aspirational outcomes. He argued that while tangible targets were hit and Iran’s military capabilities were “decimated,” ambitious goals like regime change remained unfulfilled. “The wishful goals,” he said, “were causing more uncertainty than progress.”
