365bet�����������籭

JERUSALEM/ISTANBUL

Despite broad public support in Israel for the military assault on Iran, it remains unclear if the campaign will strengthen Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s political standing, especially once the dust settles.

Targeting Iran was one of Netanyahu’s key ambitions. But the strikes launched June 13 and sustained for 12 days, came as Netanyahu is facing a fragile political future.

Netanyahu, wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes in the Gaza Strip, is under heavy domestic pressure for the failures of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack in Israel, and is nearing a decisive stage in his long-running corruption trial

He is well aware that most Israelis, including many in the opposition, support a military strike on Iran. That consensus was reflected in public statements and polling.

A June 22 survey by the Israeli Institute for National Security Studies found that 73% of Israelis supported the attacks against Iran, while 18% were opposed. The poll showed that 76% believed the decision to attack was largely or very strongly based on security considerations.

Still, just 9% of respondents believed the Iranian nuclear threat would be fully eliminated. Nearly half, 49.5%, thought it would largely be neutralized, while 27.5% believed the threat would be slightly diminished. Six percent said it will remain unchanged.​​​​​​��

From the outset of the attacks on Iran, the Israeli military released dozens of videos showcasing strikes on Iranian cities, aiming to boost morale amid missile barrages that reached Israeli cities, including Tel Aviv.

While Israelis witnessed destruction rarely seen before, especially in central Israel, officials and even opposition figures defended the war’s costs, calling them acceptable given the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear program, widely viewed in Israel as “existential.”

-Netanyahu’s popularity

The war gave a short-term boost to Netanyahu’s popularity, prompting speculation among his associates that he may seek to capitalize by calling early elections, according to Israeli media.

Although his government’s term runs through the end of 2026, opposition leaders pushed for early elections for more than a year -- demands Netanyahu has rejected during wartime.

A poll Friday by the Maariv newspaper found that the war increased support for Netanyahu’s Likud party, though not enough to form a government.

“Roughly a week after the war with Iran began and in light of the military’s achievements, Netanyahu is scoring a major political victory,” Maariv reported. The survey showed Likud gaining five Knesset (Israeli parliament) seats, going to 27 from five -- its highest showing since the attack by Hamas in October 2023.

That upward trend continued even after Tuesday’s announcement of a ceasefire. Channel 12 reported that if elections were held now, Likud would win 26 seats, edging out a new right-wing party led by former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, which is projected to win 24.

Before the war, Bennett’s party had been expected to outpace all others, according to the polls.

The Channel 12 and Maariv polls, however, suggested Netanyahu’s right-wing bloc would win 49 seats -- short of the 61 needed to form a governing coalition.

-Opposition response

While all major parties, including the opposition, welcomed the results of the war and called it a “victory,” opposition leaders credited the military for the success and deliberately avoided praising Netanyahu.

In a pre-recorded “victory speech” Tuesday, Netanyahu declared: “We have achieved a great victory and eliminated an existential threat to Israel,” calling the war a “historic triumph that will be remembered for generations.”

But many observers argue that Netanyahu’s postwar standing will depend on future revelations about the war’s actual outcomes, particularly with reports in the US that the strikes failed to destroy Iran’s nuclear program.

-Unresolved threats

Israeli military analyst Ron Ben-Yishai warned it could take months to fully assess the damage inflicted on Iran’s nuclear and missile infrastructure.

“What damage did we really inflict on Iran’s nuclear and missile programs? Is there a real possibility of a quick breakout to a 'simple' nuclear bomb?” Ben-Yishai raised the question in an analysis Wednesday in the Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper.

He questioned how willing the Iranians are to enter serious negotiations and make real concessions to the US, emphasizing that “these are the questions that must now be examined - alongside closing gaps in Israel’s civil defense.”

Ben-Yishai noted that “another key focus is Iran’s remaining missile capabilities. While Tehran launched ballistic missiles during the war, its cruise missile and drone arsenals were barely used. It's possible Iran still retains significant offensive capacity in these areas.”

-Gaza, US-Iran deal, political fallout

Questions have emerged about whether Netanyahu made concessions on Gaza as part of a broader US-Iran ceasefire deal.

“If the ceasefire (with Iran) holds, the key questions are whether the U.S. can reach a tougher nuclear deal with Iran and whether Netanyahu agreed to concessions in Gaza as part of the Trump-brokered talks,” wrote Haaretz military analyst Amos Harel.

Harel said the strikes may have altered the deterrence dynamic but fell short of dismantling Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

He said the bombings not only “set back Iran's nuclear project” but also established a “new balance of deterrence.”

With US President Donald Trump backing a ceasefire and pressuring Iran, Harel said that “the question is whether the Trump administration can reach a binding agreement that imposes far tougher demands on Iran and includes clear enforcement mechanisms.”

Still, he warned that “based on past experience, the regime (in Iran) will likely attempt to prolong negotiations for as long as possible, and will not hesitate to resort to deception and evasion to avoid international oversight.”

One possibility, Harel noted, “is an informal arrangement ‘quiet in exchange for quiet’ – under which Israel, and perhaps the United States, would strike again if the cease-fire were violated.”

“But without a detailed agreement,” he added, “what constitutes a violation? Can Israel act in response to any renewed Iranian activity in the nuclear field? Can restrictions be enforced again without full-scale war? And what happens to the 450 kilograms of 60%-enriched uranium Iran still possesses?”

He criticized Netanyahu’s war on Gaza that “is a bleeding wound, exacting a heavy price due to the government’s refusal to seek an end to the conflict.”

“While Netanyahu tries to sell Israelis on another full victory - this time against Iran - Gaza persists, along with the hostages, the dead, and a futile military campaign that kills civilians without resolving the conflict,” Harel wrote.

-Early celebrations

Maariv cautioned in an editorial that Netanyahu and Trump were “celebrating too soon.”

Despite declarations of success, it noted that reports indicate Iran’s nuclear program had not been destroyed, only delayed a few months.

“The gap between political data and reality on the ground is troubling - especially when leaders want to portray a picture of victory,” it said.

Israel launched attacks on Iran beginning June 13, striking military, nuclear and civilian sites and assassinating Iranian military commanders and nuclear scientists. The assault lasted 12 days and killed 606 victims while injuring 5,332.

In retaliation, Iran targeted Israeli intelligence and military facilities with ballistic missiles and drones, killing 28 people and wounding 3,238, Iranian state media reported.

The US then struck Iranian nuclear sites, claiming it had “ended” Tehran’s nuclear program. In response, Tehran bombed the American Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar.

The US announced a ceasefire between Israel and Iran on June 24.