After more than three and a half months of fighting and intense back-and-forth negotiations, US President Donald Trump announced that Washington and Tehran, under Pakistani mediation, have reached a final agreement to end hostilities between them.
The deal is expected to be signed in Geneva on June 19.
According to reports, the memorandum of understanding stipulates that upon signing, both sides will declare an immediate, complete, and permanent end to all hostilities across the region, including in Lebanon. The blockade on Iran would be lifted, Washington would commit not to interfere in Iran’s domestic affairs, refrain from increasing troop levels in the region, and release half of Iran’s frozen assets, an amount totaling approximately $12 billion.
In exchange, Iran would reaffirm its commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and confirm that it will never produce, develop or acquire nuclear weapons. Tehran would also reopen the Strait of Hormuz to commercial maritime traffic within 30 days, according to arrangements specified by Iran.
Israel has not taken the news lightly. Opposition leader Yair Lapid said that the emerging agreement achieves “none of Israel’s goals.”
“The regime survives, the missile program remains intact, and Iran retains the ability to rebuild its nuclear program. This is a complete failure by Netanyahu, and in the process he is turning Israel into a client state that takes orders on matters of its own national security.”
Another opposition figure, Yair Golan, was equally blunt, describing the policy as a failure.
”Trump is signing an agreement that funnels billions of dollars to the Ayatollahs’ regime, leaves the nuclear infrastructure intact, preserves the ballistic threat as it is, and throws a lifeline to the murderous regime in Tehran.”
But the frustration is not limited to politicians.
Frustrated and disappointed
Conversations with ordinary Israelis paint a picture of disappointment, anxiety, and a growing sense that a historic opportunity may have been squandered.
Mor Cohen, a 37-year-old resident of Tel Aviv, believes the agreement has missed a chance “to finish the job.”
“This deal essentially guarantees another war in the future because everything that mattered to Israel was left unaddressed, and the issues that concern us most remain unresolved.”
Her concerns are not without basis. According to estimates, before the war Iran possessed roughly 3,000 missiles, including long-range systems capable of traveling up to 2,000 kilometers. Although the conflict reportedly cut that arsenal in half, the remaining 1,500 missiles still represent a serious threat to Israel.
Nor have Israel’s nuclear concerns been fully addressed. While Washington repeatedly insisted that Iran would “never have nuclear weapons,” it offered no concrete guarantees to Israel. Nor did American officials directly address the issue of Iran’s regional proxies, namely Hezbollah in the north and the Houthis in the south, both of which continue to challenge Israel through sporadic rocket and drone attacks.
“The general feeling on the street is that Trump has sold us out,”
said Maor Attias, a 56-year-old resident of Haifa. “Americans simply don’t understand the Middle East. Iran fed them a narrative, and they bought it, either because they genuinely believed it or because they were tired of dealing with the conflict. Midterm elections are coming up, and politicians need the support of their voters. In this equation, Israel sits at the bottom of the priority list.”
Mor shares that assessment, arguing that American foreign policy is ultimately driven by interests rather than alliances.
”Trump has his own agenda. Today he may be Netanyahu’s best friend. Tomorrow he could be Kim Jong Un’s best friend if that serves his interests. It all depends on what benefits him personally and politically.”
For many Israelis, such fears are reinforced by past examples.
In 2021, thousands of Afghans who worked alongside US forces, as interpreters, guides, and government partners, were left behind during America’s withdrawal from Afghanistan. Many later faced retaliation from the Taliban, prompting criticism from veterans, lawmakers, and policy analysts.
Two years earlier, in 2019, Trump ordered US troops to pull back from parts of northern Syria, paving the way for Turkish military operations against Kurdish forces that had served as Washington’s primary ground partner in the fight against ISIS.
Not easy prey
That sense of abandonment came at a heavy cost for both the Kurds and the Afghans. Yet Mor and Maor believe Israel, unlike those allies, would not be easy prey.
”We are well-equipped, highly trained and determined to survive,” Maor said. “With or without American support, we will remain resilient and do whatever is necessary to defend ourselves.”
Mor agrees.
“The reality is that Israel may ultimately have to finish the job on its own, whether in Lebanon or Iran. Our security must remain the top priority, regardless of whether Trump approves.”
Those sentiments come as, earlier today, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz issued a written statement signaling that western Jerusalem is prepared to respond forcefully if Iran intervenes in any future confrontation involving Hezbollah.
“We will not compromise on Israel’s supreme security interests or the protection of our citizens, and we will not withdraw from the security zones,” the statement said. “If Iran attacks Israel because of events in Lebanon, we will strike it with full force and clearly demonstrate the disparity in power between us,” it concluded.
Whether Israel would have the freedom to act independently, however, remains an open question.
Israel is the largest recipient of American military assistance, and any serious rift with Washington could carry significant consequences. During the Gaza war, President Joe Biden temporarily paused shipments of certain heavy munitions, including 2,000-pound bombs, over concerns regarding civilian casualties in densely populated areas.
Trump could choose a similar course if Israel acts against Washington’s wishes.
Not everyone, however, sees the agreement as a strategic defeat.
For some Israelis, the prospect of avoiding another large-scale conflict outweighs the concerns surrounding the deal.
Simply unsustainable
Lilach Kalderon, a 40-year-old mother of three, says that the war with Iran has taken a severe emotional toll on ordinary families.
”The war with Iran was deeply traumatic, especially for families like mine. My husband serves in the reserves, and worrying about his safety kept me awake night after night. When we heard about the agreement, our family felt genuine relief because it means lives may be spared and soldiers will not be forced to spend fifty or more consecutive days serving across multiple fronts.”
She paused before adding:
”For a small country of ten million people, that kind of burden is simply unsustainable.”
Some experts are equally unconvinced that Israel could sustain a prolonged military campaign even if it chose to act independently.
Amir Oren, one of Israel’s veteran military and security analysts, argues that the country’s ability to wage a long war against either Iran or Hezbollah is constrained by both strategic and political realities.
“In the case of Iran, obviously regime change is not achievable, as assassinations did not have the desired effect and no revolution ensued. Destroying nuclear targets proved to have some effect but not for long. Ditto, ballistic missile infrastructure.
At the same time, Israel will be struck, its interception arsenal would dwindle and American support is no longer assured.
Therefore, short of an emergency surgical operation against an existential peril, such as a nuclear-tipped missile ready to be launched, a campaign would not be sustainable, with domestic support quickly denied the government, if headed by the untrustworthy Netanyahu.”
“As for Lebanon, there is a constant public outcry at the harassment Hezbollah manages to present to Galillee communities, and there is a demand that the government do away with the Iranian-backed Shiite terror organization, but this is far easier said than done. Short of a full occupation of Lebanon – which neither the Israeli public, nor any global or Arab power, will support – Hezbollah will be able to regroup and rocket from areas outside of Beirut and South Lebanon. A diplomatic arrangement, mobilizing the moderate government of Lebanon against Hezbollah, seems like an optimal way out of the crisis.”
“The IDF, if deployed properly and on alert, having learned the terrible lessons of October 7, will always be able to defend Israel proper, but as for offensive operations, attrition wars or casualty-ridden campaigns – there is little to suggest that they would be sustainable.”
As diplomats prepare to gather in Geneva, the agreement may have succeeded in stopping a war. Whether it has secured a lasting peace, or merely postponed the next conflict, remains a question that hangs heavily over Israel.
One thing is certain: while the guns may be falling silent, the battle over what this deal means for Israel’s future has only just begun.