- Welcome to Attaqwaa.org.
Posted by Awwal
- Jun 15, 2026, 07:57 PMMany Israelis have reacted with anger to the announcement of an interim peace agreement between the United States and Iran. The criticism has come from both government supporters and opposition figures, with much of the blame directed at Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Critics argue that Netanyahu encouraged US President Donald Trump to take military action against Iran while promising major strategic gains. However, they believe the conflict is ending before Israel has achieved its main objectives, leaving the country in a weaker position than expected.
Former Prime Minister Ehud Barak strongly criticized Netanyahu, saying Iran emerged stronger while Israel emerged weaker. Opposition leader Yair Lapid also described the agreement as one of the most serious failures in Israel's foreign and security policy in recent years.
The deal has also raised concerns about Israel's military activities in Lebanon. Reports suggest that Iran wanted any agreement with the United States to include an end to Israeli military operations in Lebanon. This has created uncertainty about Israel's future actions against Hezbollah.
Several Israeli leaders insist that military pressure on Hezbollah should continue. Defense Minister Israel Katz said Israeli forces would remain in Lebanon, while National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir stated that Israel should accept nothing less than the complete dismantling of Hezbollah.
Many analysts and political figures argue that the war did not fully achieve its stated goals. They point out that Iran's influence in the region remains significant, its missile capabilities have not been completely eliminated, and questions remain about the actual damage done to its nuclear and ballistic missile programs. There are also concerns that the agreement could provide Iran with economic benefits through sanctions relief and the release of frozen assets.
Source:
Critics argue that Netanyahu encouraged US President Donald Trump to take military action against Iran while promising major strategic gains. However, they believe the conflict is ending before Israel has achieved its main objectives, leaving the country in a weaker position than expected.
Former Prime Minister Ehud Barak strongly criticized Netanyahu, saying Iran emerged stronger while Israel emerged weaker. Opposition leader Yair Lapid also described the agreement as one of the most serious failures in Israel's foreign and security policy in recent years.
The deal has also raised concerns about Israel's military activities in Lebanon. Reports suggest that Iran wanted any agreement with the United States to include an end to Israeli military operations in Lebanon. This has created uncertainty about Israel's future actions against Hezbollah.
Several Israeli leaders insist that military pressure on Hezbollah should continue. Defense Minister Israel Katz said Israeli forces would remain in Lebanon, while National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir stated that Israel should accept nothing less than the complete dismantling of Hezbollah.
Many analysts and political figures argue that the war did not fully achieve its stated goals. They point out that Iran's influence in the region remains significant, its missile capabilities have not been completely eliminated, and questions remain about the actual damage done to its nuclear and ballistic missile programs. There are also concerns that the agreement could provide Iran with economic benefits through sanctions relief and the release of frozen assets.
Source: