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

In late February, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared the initiation of a joint Israeli-US military operation against Iran, expressing confidence in its outcome. However, the response from his office on the ceasefire announcement later that week was more subdued, highlighting that the decision was primarily attributed to President Donald Trump. This contrast was evident compared to the celebratory claims from both the United States and Iran, which framed the five-week conflict as a major triumph.

Despite the ceasefire, Netanyahu emphasized that the truce was not the final chapter. He stated that Israel still had more objectives to pursue, either through continued military action or diplomatic negotiations. The war’s conclusion left Israel’s leadership with unmet targets, as Iran’s armed forces remained active, its clerical leadership intact, and the nuclear program unresolved. While key figures like Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei were eliminated, the missile threat persisted, with Iran launching barrages at Israeli territory throughout the campaign.

Netanyahu’s initial assertions, such as the goal to “end the threat from the Ayatollah regime,” have not materialized. The ongoing conflict and Iran’s leadership structure remain unchanged, despite significant strikes. Anshel Pfeffer, a veteran Israeli journalist and biographer of Netanyahu, noted that the prime minister had only mentioned a “suspension” of hostilities, not a definitive end. He argued that Netanyahu’s failure to achieve his stated aims was politically damaging and risked creating a divide with the United States, particularly if Israel’s role in the agreement was minimal.

Israeli Opposition Criticizes Netanyahu’s Performance

Yair Lapid, head of Israel’s opposition, called the outcome a “political disaster” in the nation’s history. He criticized Netanyahu for not securing a seat at the negotiating table during critical decisions about Israel’s security. “The army did everything they asked of it, the public showed incredible resilience, but Netanyahu failed politically, strategically, and in meeting his own objectives,” Lapid stated.

“Netanyahu promised Israelis that this campaign would end the Islamic regime, that by cutting the head of the snake, this war would remove an existential threat from Israel.” — Shira Efron, an analyst at RAND Corporation

Efron argued that the ceasefire was a “hard” sell to the public because Iran’s nuclear capabilities and missile threat were not fully dismantled. She pointed out that while production facilities were targeted, the program still existed, and the degradation of Iran’s arsenal was not visibly impactful for those in shelters during the conflict.

Military Analysts Note Achieved Objectives

Yossi Kuperwasser, former Israeli military intelligence officer and director of the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS), acknowledged that “practical achievable goals” had been met. He explained that Iran’s military infrastructure and leadership were “decimated” through strikes, fulfilling key operational targets. However, he noted that “wishful goals,” such as triggering a popular uprising or removing highly enriched uranium, had not materialized, leaving Netanyahu’s strategic vision incomplete.