On the 14th (local time), as the United States and Iran effectively agreed to "end-of-war talks," discontent is erupting inside Israel, which fought this war alongside the United States, that the talks were conducted in a way that falls short of the war goals it set.
On this day, the New York Times reported that even before the cease-fire agreement was announced, as parts of it became known through media reports, criticism and concern were pouring out across Israel's political sphere.
Before news of the agreement was delivered, Yedioth Ahronoth, Israel's leading daily, used the front-page headline to describe Israeli sentiment about the Iran cease-fire agreement being pursued by President Donald Trump as a "bad deal."
According to Reuters and others, the U.S.-Iran agreement includes reopening the Strait of Hormuz, a key maritime trade route for the global economy, and the United States lifting its blockade on Iranian ports. The release of about $25 billion (about 38 trillion won) in frozen Iranian assets was also reportedly included as a key condition.
The complete dismantlement of Iran's nuclear program and the establishment of permanent peace—the issues over which the two sides clashed most sharply during the talks—were left for additional negotiations over the next 60 days. But that is precisely what is fueling concern within Israel.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said early in the war that the goal was to "remove the existential threat to Israel." He has set goals that include eliminating Iran's nuclear threat, creating an environment in which the Iranian people can replace the current regime, and ending support for Iran's proxies such as Lebanon's Hezbollah, Yemen's Houthi rebels, and the Palestinian militant group Hamas.
However, Israel, which began this war alongside the United States, was effectively excluded during the talks, and as a result, the agreement is being assessed as falling far short of the goals Israel laid out.
An Israeli official, who requested anonymity because of diplomatic discussions, cited as problems with the U.S.-Iran agreement that there is no clear plan for handling Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium and that the restrictions on the nuclear program are insufficient. The official said the deal appears to rely excessively on Iran's "good faith."
Jacob Nagel, who served as acting national security adviser to Prime Minister Netanyahu, also told reporters in a video briefing on Sunday that "it is very easy to talk about the agenda for future negotiations," but pointed out that "Iran's ballistic missiles and its support for regional proxies are not included anywhere in the publicly known terms of the agreement."
Harsh criticism is mounting in Israeli politics. Avigdor Lieberman, a former defense minister with a right-wing bent, wrote on social media (SNS) that "from Israel's perspective, it is a disaster." Yair Lapid, a centrist opposition leader and former prime minister, also said, "I hope the reported details are not true," adding, "If they are, it will be one of the most shocking failures of Israel's foreign and security policy."
A rift also emerged between Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Trump ahead of the cease-fire. Regarding Israel's airstrike on Beirut, Lebanon, Trump said on social media that "Israel has the right to defend itself, but this attack was a very small and meaningless attack that resulted in not a single casualty," adding, "Such attacks must not interfere with the important process toward peace," in a public rebuke.
Netanyahu, who has touted his close relationship with President Trump as a political asset, has found himself in a bind with this agreement. With a general election coming in Oct., he is under heavy pressure from both his coalition and the opposition not to accept Trump's demands as they are, the New York Times reported.