Israel emerged as the loser of the war with Iran. And here's why
The truce between the United States and Iran, concluded on April 8, was seriously tested on the same day when Israel conducted large—scale bombing on the territory of neighboring Lebanon, where Iran's allied forces, the Hezbollah movement, are located. After accusations of a breakdown in the agreements, the United States was quick to declare that Lebanon was not part of the deal. Why Israel attacked Lebanon right now and whether the Israeli army has succeeded in achieving its stated goals during the operation in Iran — in the Izvestia article.
Mismatch of goals with the United States
• Judging by the statements of the office of the President of the United States in the press, it was Israel that was the main instigator who pushed the United States to start a war in Iran. But the allied countries that attacked Iran on February 28, 2026, initially pursued different goals. The United States was counting not just on regime change, but on the establishment of the same governance model in the country that had previously been implemented in Venezuela — the economic one. US President Donald Trump has made no secret of the fact that his goal was to gain control over Iranian energy resources. In addition, the attacks on Iran were actually a blow to China, the main consumer of Iranian crude oil.
• Israel initially stated the goal of regime change in Iran, but at the same time hoped to weaken its main opponent in the region as much as possible. The plan included the destruction of Iran's nuclear program and the very prospect of such developments in the future, as well as the disarmament of the country, primarily with regard to ballistic missiles. Since Iran's doctrine presupposes the cessation of Israel's existence, Tel Aviv considers Tehran an existential threat.
• Despite Tel Aviv's statements that the objectives set for the operation in Iran have been achieved, Israel has failed to achieve any of its stated goals. The regime change, as Tel Aviv saw it, failed: the calculation that the assassination of the country's top officials would provoke revolutionary sentiments among the population was unsuccessful, and those oppositionists who had ties to the United States and Israel and could theoretically lead the country were actually driven out of the territory as a result of previous attacks. In addition, the Iranian tradition of preparing several successors for each leader did not allow the regime to be beheaded.
• Tel Aviv had to agree to a truce because it was losing an important ally: the United States was forced to switch from the war in Iran to the fight against the pro-European lobby, which supports opposition forces in Hungary, where parliamentary elections will be held on April 12. In addition, Israel suffered serious losses during the conflict, primarily economic ones. Attacks by Iranian missiles and drones were carried out not only on the port of Haifa and oil refineries, but also on almost the entire infrastructure of Israel.
The conflict has weakened Israel's position
• Israel is losing popularity in the United States — not only the Democrats, who benefit from Trump's election defeat, but also many Republicans disavowed the military operation in Iran. The fact that US Vice President Jay Dee Vance, who is opposed to any military intervention in other countries, was involved in the negotiation process with Iran may indicate a weakening of the influence of supporters of war on the policy of the White House and the muffling of the voice of Tel Aviv, because American "hawks" are often lobbyists of Israeli interests.
Washington is losing confidence in Tel Aviv. The foreign press claims that it was the participation of Iran's new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, that ensured the truce. The US contacts with Khamenei were kept secret from Israel, effectively excluding it from the negotiation process. Washington's negotiations with other Iranian officials did not yield results, and Israel's participation could disrupt the negotiation process, since Tel Aviv has repeatedly attempted to eliminate the Iranian leader. Israel has already put the truce in jeopardy by conducting massive attacks on Lebanese territory, although one of Iran's demands was a cessation of hostilities, including against its allied forces, the Lebanese Hezbollah. The US later said Lebanon was "not part of the deal."
• The truce with Iran has weakened Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's position inside the country. He was criticized by the opposition and the center-left, who accused him of failing to defend Israel's national security interests and the biggest strategic failure in the country's history, since none of the goals were achieved: Iran's nuclear program and ballistic missile stockpiles were not destroyed, and the regime maintained its position and became even stronger as a result of the conflict. Netanyahu's critics fear that the resumption of hostilities will put Israel in tougher conditions.
Israel's goals in Lebanon have not been achieved
• The operation in Lebanon is Netanyahu's last chance to restore his reputation inside the country and among the leaders of the pro—Israel lobby in the United States, where there is also growing disillusionment with the prime minister, who last year already declared victory over Iran. During the truce, Israel could concentrate on creating a deep buffer zone on the border with Lebanon, as it was before 2000, when Israel had to withdraw its troops from the country in accordance with UN Security Council resolution 425.
• Many villages in southern Lebanon are located on hills with views of Israeli cities, which Tel Aviv considers a threat to its security. Israel sought to disarm Hezbollah and create a buffer zone during military operations in Lebanon in 2024, but then the US administration held back Tel Aviv's ambitions for fear of unleashing a full-scale war between Iran and Israel. The possible breakdown of negotiations and a truce due to the attack on Lebanon, whose security Iran has designated as one of its demands, is also in Israel's favor, as it will give Tel Aviv the opportunity to return to military action in an attempt at revenge.
During the preparation of the material, Izvestia interviewed:
- political scientist Vadim Mingalev.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
