As the war on Iran enters a fragile two-week ceasefire while fighting and tensions persist, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appears politically weakened, with the outcome so far falling short of "Israel’s" strategic aims, according to an analysis published on Wednesday by The Guardian’s international correspondent Peter Beaumont.

The analysis argues that Netanyahu had long pushed for aggression on Iran, using a combination of public threats, diplomatic pressure on Washington, and sustained messaging portraying Tehran as an existential threat. Yet expectations of a swift and decisive campaign have not materialized, as the war has extended beyond initial projections without delivering key strategic outcomes.

According to the report, assumptions that the war would trigger internal collapse in Iran have proven unfounded. Intelligence assessments that dismissed Israeli claims of imminent regime change as unrealistic appear to have been validated, while early projections that the fighting would conclude within days or weeks failed to materialize.

The analysis also points to growing strains between "Israel" and the United States toward the later stages of the escalation. Despite Netanyahu’s reported attempts to dissuade Donald Trump from endorsing a ceasefire, Washington ultimately opted for de-escalation, with some accounts suggesting "Israel" was not central to the final decision-making process.

Israeli political backlash

Political backlash within "Israel" has intensified following the ceasefire announcement. Opposition leader Yair Lapid wrote, “There has never been a political disaster like this in our entire history. Israel was not even close to the table when decisions were made concerning the core of our national security.”

Lapid added, “The army carried out everything that was asked of it, and the public showed remarkable resilience, but Netanyahu failed politically, failed strategically, and did not achieve any of the goals he himself set. It will take us years to repair the political and strategic damage that Netanyahu caused due to arrogance, negligence, and lack of strategic planning.”

Similarly, Yair Golan described the outcome as a “strategic failure", stating, “He promised a historic victory and security for generations, and in practice, we got one of the most severe strategic failures Israel has ever known.” He added, “It’s a total failure that endangers Israel’s security for years to come.”

Objectives remain unmet

Beaumont’s analysis indicates that "Israel" has yet to achieve its central wartime objectives, including destabilizing Iran’s governing structure, eliminating its nuclear capabilities, or significantly degrading state capacity. Instead, Iran’s system remains intact, with its military institutions, including the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps, continuing to operate despite sustaining damage.

The report further suggests that the regional security landscape remains unstable. "Israel’s" ongoing aggression on southern Lebanon continues to deepen its confrontation with Hezbollah, while Iran is expected to pursue rearmament as it recalibrates following the current phase of the war.

Diplomatically, the war has contributed to widening divisions, particularly in the United States, where support for "Israel" has come under increasing scrutiny. The analysis points to a weakening political consensus, with criticism emerging from both progressive and conservative camps.

Netanyahu under pressure

At the domestic level, Netanyahu faces growing pressure ahead of elections, as the gap between declared war aims and actual outcomes becomes more apparent. The analysis concludes that, despite the scale of the campaign and US backing, the aggression has not produced a decisive shift in "Israel’s" strategic position.

Beaumont also cites Israeli military analyst Amos Harel, who wrote: “Many of the weaknesses shared by the current US administration and Israel’s system under Netanyahu came into view: a tendency to gamble based on unfounded wishful thinking, shallow and half-baked plans, disregard for experts, or the aggressive use of pressure to make them align their views with the wishes of the political leadership.”

The analysis adds that the current war may represent a rare instance of "Israel" engaging Iran with sustained US support, conditions that may not be easily replicated. With Washington showing reluctance to escalate further, particularly through ground operations, the likelihood of a similar campaign in the near term appears limited.

As negotiations continue during the temporary ceasefire, the emerging framework is seen as closer to earlier diplomatic arrangements, including those pursued during the administration of former US President Barack Obama, rather than signaling a fundamentally new strategic reality.

Source:Websites