Dr. Ahmad Abdelkader Yahia‏‏

The announcement that the United States and Iran had signed a <a href="https://www.mako.co.il/news-world/2026_q2/Article-3f2949e7c96de91027.htm" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">memorandum of understanding</a> triggered widespread anger in Israel. The agreement includes arrangements for ending hostilities and launching a new 60-day negotiating process to reach a final settlement on outstanding issues, most notably Iran’s nuclear program.This development came at a time when Israel had expected the war—and the accompanying military and economic pressure on Iran—to result in a deal with tougher conditions for Tehran, particularly regarding its nuclear program, missile capabilities, and support for regional proxies.Details of the memorandum, which were <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2026/06/17/middleeast/us-iran-war-mou-text-intl" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">released</a> by a White House official on the evening of Wednesday, June 17, 2026, together with reports that Israel had been excluded from key stages of the negotiations, have prompted strong criticism from political, security, and media circles inside Israel. The current backlash appears to extend beyond disagreements over specific provisions of the agreement and to reflect broader concerns about Israel’s ability to influence US decision-making about Iran and to shape future regional dynamics.Growing AngerIsraeli political, security, and media figures have expressed deep frustration with the US-Iran agreement. Many Israeli <a href="https://nypost.com/2026/06/14/world-news/israelis-slam-us-iran-peace-deal-as-a-bad-deal/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">officials</a> have argued that the agreement falls short of the objectives Israel sought to achieve during its recent confrontation with Iran.Signs of discontent first emerged following <a href="https://nypost.com/2026/06/16/us-news/trump-admin-rejected-israels-request-to-see-iran-deal-text-report/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">reports</a> that the US administration had refused to share details of the memorandum with Israel during the drafting process, fueling dissatisfaction within the Israeli government. These concerns intensified amid claims that Israel had been <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-avoids-criticizing-us-iran-deal-claims-wars-main-goals-have-been-achieved/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">sidelined</a> from negotiations despite being a central party in the conflict with Iran.Israeli media <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/pm-called-off-major-iran-strike-after-trump-warned-israel-would-be-on-its-own-reports/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">reports</a> also revealed that US President Donald Trump had personally intervened to halt a major Israeli airstrike against multiple targets inside Iran shortly before it was scheduled to take place. The incident reinforced perceptions of a widening gap between Washington and Tel Aviv regarding how the post-war phase should be managed.Against this backdrop, <a href="https://www.iranintl.com/en/202606153701" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Israeli officials</a> stressed that Israel was not a party to the recent deal. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/15/world/middleeast/netanyahu-israel-iran.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Prime Minister</a> Benjamin Netanyahu also insisted that Israel does not consider itself bound by any understandings related to the Lebanese arena, <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/6/15/netanyahu-says-israel-wont-leave-occupied-land-in-lebanon?" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">rejecting</a> arrangements that could lead to an Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon or restrict military operations against militia Hezbollah.At the same time, cabinet ministers such as Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich intensified their criticism of the agreement. <a href="https://x.com/bezalelsm/status/2066423628153922003" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Smotrich described</a> it as "a bad deal for Israel and the entire free world," while Ben-Gvir argued that Israel was under no obligation to abide by it. Both <a href="https://x.com/itamarbengvir/status/2066392115027050781" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">emphasized</a> the need to maintain pressure on Iran, prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, preserve Israel’s operational freedom in Lebanon, and reject any arrangements that would constrain military action against militia Hezbollah.The Israeli opposition also <a href="https://www.bhol.co.il/news/1730496?" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">launched sharp attacks</a> on both the deal and the Israeli government’s handling of the issue. Yair Golan, leader of the Democrats party, described the deal as "the greatest strategic failure in Israel’s history," holding Netanyahu responsible for weakening Israeli deterrence. Similarly, Benny Gantz, leader of the Blue and White party, argued that the agreement was a strategic failure with long-term political and security consequences.Multiple Drivers Several factors help explain the growing Israeli opposition to the US-Iran agreement, including the following:1. Israel Appears to be Marginalized on a Core National Security Issue: Israeli criticism intensified following media leaks suggesting that the Trump administration had refused to brief Israel on the details of the memorandum. This reinforced perceptions within Israeli political and security circles that Tel Aviv was no longer a central partner in managing the conflict with Iran, as it had been previously.These concerns deepened after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu <a href="https://www.i24news.tv/ar/%D8%A3%D8%AE%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B1/middle-east/artc-76cc59f0" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">admitted</a> that he did not have full knowledge of the agreement’s details. Several Israeli media outlets and commentators openly criticized President Trump, while some questioned whether Israel could continue to <a href="https://www.israelhayom.com/2026/06/15/the-iran-deal-is-an-american-failure-that-endangers-israel/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">rely on</a> the United States in the same way as before.2. Trump’s Approach to Ending the War Without New Strategic Arrangements: Part of the Israeli backlash stems from a growing belief that the Trump administration has <a href="https://www.bankingnews.gr/diethni/articles/882317/admission-of-defeat-trump-regime-change-in-iran-has-failed-vance-the-ground-offensive-would-be-a-tragedy-the-12-terms-and-the-300-billion%20title=" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">retreated</a> from the maximum-pressure military strategy it initially had pursued against Iran. Some Israeli observers have even argued that Washington has effectively acknowledged the failure of efforts to bring down the Iranian regime.This perception was reinforced by reports that Trump had intervened to cancel a major Israeli strike inside Iran, as well as by Washington’s shift toward a negotiating track that did not address several of the issues that had led to the outbreak of the war. From the Israeli perspective, the agreement appeared to reflect a US desire to end the conflict rather than an attempt to impose new strategic constraints on Iran’s future capabilities.3. Concerns About the Survival of Iran’s Strategic Capabilities: Many in Israel have argued that the <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/trumps-deal-is-a-catastrophic-capitulation-to-irans-aggressors-leaves-israel-vulnerable-and-constrained/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">agreement</a> did not address the issues that were considered central objectives of both the war and the pressure campaign against Iran.The memorandum did not call for dismantling Iran’s uranium-enrichment infrastructure or removing enriched materials from the country. Nor did it address Iran’s ballistic missile program or its network of regional militias. According to this view, the agreement allows Iran to retain key elements of its strategic power while simultaneously securing significant political and economic gains.4. Economic Relief Could Strengthen Iran Further: Israeli <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/trumps-deal-is-a-catastrophic-capitulation-to-irans-aggressors-leaves-israel-vulnerable-and-constrained/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">criticism</a> has also focused on provisions in the agreement related to sanctions relief, the release of frozen Iranian assets, and the facilitation of oil and petrochemical exports without what critics regard as meaningful strategic concessions from Tehran.Many <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/report-israeli-officials-warn-us-iran-deal-does-not-serve-israels-interests/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Israeli analysts</a> fear that these measures could provide Iran with substantial financial resources that would enable it to rebuild military capabilities, ease domestic economic pressures, and expand regional influence following the war. In Israel’s view, such outcomes would run directly counter to the objectives of the recent conflict.5. Efforts to Dismantle Fronts in Lebanon: The Lebanese arena has emerged as one of the most significant sources of Israeli opposition to the agreement, particularly because the memorandum refers to ending the war "on all fronts, including in Lebanon."Israeli officials have repeatedly stated that Israel will not withdraw from southern Lebanon and will not accept arrangements that limit military operations against militia Hezbollah. There are growing concerns that the agreement could give Iran indirect influence over Israeli military decision-making in Lebanon while reinforcing Iran’s "unity of fronts," despite Israel’s long-standing efforts to separate and contain individual theaters of conflict.ConclusionOverall, Israel’s growing anger over the US-Iran deal reflects concerns that extend beyond the contents of the deal itself. The debate is closely tied to broader questions regarding Israel’s regional position and its future role in shaping policy toward Iran.From Tel Aviv’s perspective, the agreement fails to achieve the objectives Israel sought during the war while granting Iran significant political and economic relief without eliminating its core strategic capabilities. Moreover, the negotiation process has exposed what many Israelis view as a decline in their country’s ability to influence major US strategic decisions.As a result, Israel is likely to intensify political pressure on Washington while maintaining its refusal to withdraw from Lebanon. Such steps could create new realities on the ground and gradually undermine efforts to establish lasting arrangements, reshaping the regional order in ways that Israel considers contrary to its interests.

Why Does Israel Oppose the US–Iran Deal?