Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid slams Netanyahu over US-Iran ceasefire
TELAVIV: Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid has sharply criticized Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for supporting a temporary ceasefire between the United States and Iran, describing the move as a “political and strategic failure” that could have lasting consequences for Israel’s national security.
In a post on X, Lapid expressed strong disapproval of the government’s role in recent negotiations. “We have never seen such a political catastrophe in our history. Israel was not even present when decisions were made about the core of our national security,” he wrote. He further accused Netanyahu of demonstrating “arrogance, negligence and lack of strategic planning,” warning that the political and strategic damage inflicted could take years to repair.
Lapid underlined that while Israel’s military forces and civilians had fulfilled their responsibilities, the government had fallen short in achieving its objectives. “The army carried out everything it was asked to do, and the people showed extraordinary resilience,” he said. “But Netanyahu failed politically and strategically and did not achieve any of the goals he set for himself.”
Netanyahu’s office confirmed Israel’s support for US President Donald Trump’s decision to suspend military action against Iran for a two-week period, though it clarified that the ceasefire does not extend to Lebanon. The announcement followed Trump’s declaration on Tuesday to “suspend the bombing and attack of Iran for a period of two weeks.”
US-Iran Relations and Israel’s Security Concerns
The temporary ceasefire comes amid a backdrop of heightened tensions between the United States and Iran, rooted in decades of conflict and strategic rivalry. Iran’s nuclear program, its influence in neighboring countries such as Lebanon and Syria, and repeated military confrontations have historically placed Israel in a precarious security position. Netanyahu, who has long positioned himself as a staunch defender against Iranian threats, now faces domestic criticism for apparently supporting a pause in US military pressure.
Lapid’s comments reflect broader concern in Israel’s political landscape: that decisions affecting Israeli security were made without direct consultation or involvement of the country’s leadership. Opposition figures argue that this could weaken Israel’s strategic leverage in future negotiations and embolden regional adversaries.
The Ceasefire Agreement: Temporary Calm in a Volatile Region
The two-week ceasefire between the US and Iran was brokered through mediation efforts led by Pakistan, with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif announcing early Wednesday that both sides and their allies had accepted an immediate halt to hostilities. The agreement came just hours before Trump’s self-imposed “deadline for destroying an entire civilisation” in Iran.
As part of the deal, Iran agreed to reopen the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz, ensuring safe passage for global oil shipments—a key concern for international markets. Both Washington and Tehran have been invited to Islamabad for further talks on April 10, aimed at negotiating a more permanent resolution.
While leaders from both sides have hailed the ceasefire as a potential confidence-building step, analysts caution that the pause may merely buy time rather than address deeper political and strategic issues. Persistent mistrust, regional proxy conflicts, and historical grievances continue to complicate the path to a lasting settlement.
Global markets responded positively to the ceasefire news, with oil prices easing and stock futures rising on hopes that broader peace negotiations could finally gain traction. However, experts warn that even a short-term agreement may not prevent flare-ups in the region, particularly given the ongoing tensions in Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq.
Implications for Israel
Lapid’s critique highlights an internal political debate over Israel’s role in shaping regional security. Historically, Israeli leaders have emphasized the importance of direct involvement in US-Iran negotiations, fearing that exclusion could undermine Israel’s ability to influence outcomes that directly affect its safety.
By backing the ceasefire without ensuring a seat at the negotiating table, Netanyahu risks domestic political fallout, with opposition voices questioning his strategic judgment. “Years of political and strategic effort could be undone by decisions made without Israel’s input,” Lapid warned, signaling that the repercussions of this agreement could extend far beyond the immediate two-week pause.