BY EMMANUEL OGBONNA
Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid sharply criticized the emerging agreement between the United States and Iran on Monday, arguing that the proposed deal fails to achieve Israel’s central objectives in the war against Tehran and exposes what he described as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s weakening influence in Washington.
Speaking to reporters in Jerusalem, Lapid said the framework currently under discussion between Washington and Tehran was deeply troubling and represented a major strategic failure for Israel after months of military confrontation and diplomatic pressure.
“The deal is bad for Israel, bad for the region, bad for the citizens of Iran,” Lapid said, warning that the agreement appeared unlikely to dismantle Iran’s broader military capabilities or curb its regional influence.
The comments come at a politically sensitive moment for Netanyahu as Israel moves closer toward national elections expected by the end of October. The prime minister is facing growing criticism from political opponents who argue that the war has not achieved its publicly declared goals despite the enormous military and economic costs incurred during months of conflict.
Israel and the United States launched military operations against Iran on Feb. 28, declaring that the campaign aimed to destroy Iran’s ballistic missile infrastructure, halt support for allied militant groups across the Middle East and permanently prevent Tehran from obtaining nuclear weapons capabilities.
Netanyahu and U.S. President Donald Trump also openly expressed hopes that sustained military and economic pressure could eventually weaken or even topple Iran’s ruling government.
However, according to regional officials familiar with ongoing negotiations, the current deal under discussion appears significantly narrower in scope than Israel’s original war aims.
Under the proposed framework, Iran would reportedly surrender its stockpile of highly enriched uranium and reopen the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz in exchange for an end to the U.S. blockade of Iranian ports and the lifting of sanctions imposed during the conflict.
Additional negotiations over Iran’s broader nuclear program would then continue during a 60-day diplomatic period following the agreement.
The proposed arrangement has raised concerns within Israel because it remains unclear whether the deal would address Iran’s ballistic missile program or its longstanding support for proxy militant organizations operating across the Middle East, including groups hostile to Israel.
Lapid said Israel had reason to be grateful for Washington’s military partnership during the conflict, particularly Trump’s decision to join Israel in confronting Iran militarily. However, he accused Netanyahu’s government of failing to maintain sufficient influence over the American administration during the negotiation process.
“The Israeli government is at an all-time low in its ability to influence decisions in Washington,” Lapid said.
He pointed to remarks Trump made last week suggesting that Netanyahu would ultimately follow Washington’s lead regarding the conflict and any diplomatic settlement.
The criticism underscores growing domestic political tensions inside Israel as public debate intensifies over whether the war achieved meaningful strategic gains.
Opinion polls in recent weeks have shown increasing frustration among Israeli voters over the prolonged conflict and uncertainty surrounding its outcome. Critics argue that despite months of military operations, key Iranian military capabilities remain intact while regional instability has deepened.
Lapid currently heads the centrist Yesh Atid party and is once again aligned politically with former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett in an effort to unseat Netanyahu.
The two politicians previously formed a coalition government in 2021 that temporarily ended Netanyahu’s 12-year stretch in power. Under a rotation agreement, Bennett initially served as prime minister before Lapid briefly assumed the role in 2022.
That coalition eventually collapsed, allowing Netanyahu to return to office later that year.
Now Bennett and Lapid have reunited politically, combining their parties into a single alliance ahead of the upcoming elections in hopes of consolidating Israel’s fragmented opposition movement.
Their alliance is largely driven by shared opposition to Netanyahu, whose lengthy tenure and divisive leadership style continue to dominate Israeli politics.
Beyond the Iran issue, Lapid also addressed the future of Israeli-Palestinian relations, signaling that a renewed push for Palestinian statehood would not be part of the next government’s immediate agenda if the opposition succeeds in forming a coalition.
Lapid, who has long been considered one of the more moderate voices in Israeli politics regarding the Palestinian issue, said the political climate inside Israel had fundamentally changed following the Hamas attacks of Oct. 7, 2023, and the wars that followed.
“There will be no two-state solution in the coming years, because Israelis now understand this will become just another failing terrorist state on our borders,” Lapid said.
He argued that the Palestinian Authority currently lacks the capability to effectively prevent militant attacks against Israel, further eroding Israeli confidence in future peace negotiations.
At the same time, Lapid said he would oppose unilateral Israeli measures that could permanently eliminate the possibility of a future Palestinian state. He added that Bennett, despite his history as a leader closely associated with the West Bank settlement movement, had assured him that annexation of occupied Palestinian territories would not be pursued under their alliance.
The opposition leader also ruled out repeating one of the most controversial elements of the previous anti-Netanyahu coalition — cooperation with Arab political parties.
In 2021, Lapid and Bennett broke longstanding political precedent by bringing Mansour Abbas and his Arab faction into the governing coalition, marking the first time an independent Arab party formally joined an Israeli government coalition.
That partnership drew fierce criticism from right-wing politicians at the time but proved essential in enabling the coalition to secure a parliamentary majority.
Current polling suggests Bennett and Lapid may again struggle to form a governing coalition without support from Arab lawmakers. Nevertheless, Lapid said the political and security realities following years of conflict had changed dramatically.
“That was the right government for the moment,” Lapid said of the previous coalition arrangement, adding that he and Bennett would not seek to form another government with Abbas’ party after the upcoming elections.
As Israel heads toward another contentious election campaign, debates over Iran, national security, relations with Washington and the future of the Palestinian issue are expected to dominate political discourse, with Netanyahu facing mounting pressure from both political rivals and a public increasingly divided over the direction of the country after years of war and instability.