In the wake of mounting Israeli backlash against the pending agreement between the United States and Iran, top regional military and security analysts have issued stark warnings that the deal will reshape Middle East power dynamics, cement Iran’s rise as a dominant regional force, and stand as one of the most consequential strategic failures of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s tenure.
The wave of criticism began Sunday, when Israeli politicians and media figures publicly voiced outrage over the emerging framework. By Monday, veteran military correspondent Alon Ben David of Israel’s Channel 13 News outlined the long-term risks, framing the deal as a paradigm shift that will undo decades of Israeli regional primacy backed by Washington. “This is a dramatic day for Israel and for generations to come,” Ben David said, noting that the agreement marks a permanent turning point for power balances across the Middle East. For years, Israel held the title of the region’s strongest, most dominant power, with unwavering American support. But Ben David argued the pending deal clears an unobstructed path for Iran to overtake that position as the most influential actor in the Middle East.
A core provision of the deal, Ben David explained, will unfreeze billions of dollars in Iranian assets held abroad, and unlock an additional $300 billion in new revenue for the Iranian government. Those additional funds, he warned, will directly enable Iran to continue financing its regional proxy networks in Lebanon and Yemen — groups that Israel has long identified as existential threats to its national security. Compounding this risk, Ben David added, the deal will leave Israel facing an emboldened, vengeful Iranian regime with growing access to nuclear capabilities. “The agreement could leave Israel facing not only a stronger Iran, but a nuclear Iran,” he said.
Ben David’s assessment was echoed just a day later by Danny Citrinowicz, a senior fellow at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies. Citrinowicz argued that the joint Israeli-U.S. military campaign against Iran will end with the Iranian regime not just surviving, but emerging more powerful and formally engaged with Washington than ever before. “The Iranian leadership demonstrated resilience, retained control, and shown a willingness to absorb substantial costs,” he noted, a stark contrast to Israeli goals of weakening the regime.
Beyond the strategic risks, an independent economic analysis published Tuesday by leading Israeli financial daily Calcalist labeled Israel’s war on Iran a costly failure that has blown a massive hole in the country’s public finances. The outlet pegged total direct costs of the conflict at 50 billion shekels — funds the country did not have allocated in its original budget. A large share of those costs went to bombs and munitions dropped by the Israeli Air Force during strikes on Iran, with another major portion going to replace rapidly depleted stocks of air defense interceptors.
In the aftermath of the campaign, the Israeli military has already requested an additional 44 billion shekels ($15 billion) to add to its already record-high annual budget, pushing the total defense budget to 188 billion shekels ($64 billion). Calcalist noted that this is almost certainly not the last budget increase the military will request, pointing to Netanyahu’s recent proposal for a 350 billion shekel increase in security spending over the next decade, all earmarked for new military acquisitions demanded by the armed forces.
The report also cast sharp doubt on the economic plans of Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who joined Sunday’s criticism of the U.S.-Iran deal and vowed Israel would continue its fight against Iran and Iranian proxies in Lebanon. Smotrich has yet to put forward any viable plan to finance the multi-front military conflict Israel is currently fighting across Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran, Calcalist pointed out.
With U.S. and Iranian negotiators set to finalize the full text of the agreement this Friday, Haaretz senior military analyst Amos Harel went a step further Wednesday, calling the deal the worst failure of Netanyahu’s leadership since the October 7, 2023 attacks by Hamas. Harel wrote that “the Iran affair is emerging as the second-worst fiasco in Netanyahu’s long history,” with only the October 7 assault — which killed more than 1,200 Israelis — ranking as a greater disaster. “The agreement will apparently satisfy only a small fraction of the expectations Netanyahu had,” Harel explained, adding that the dispute has also opened a growing rift between Netanyahu and U.S. President Donald Trump.
Even as details of the final agreement remain unconfirmed, Harel noted that Iran has already emerged from the war stronger and more determined than it was before hostilities began. Backing for this view can be seen among pro-Netanyahu Israeli media outlets, which have already accused Trump of betraying Israeli interests. Beyond the strategic shift toward Iran, Harel argued that the outcome of the war and the pending deal reveal just how much damage Netanyahu has inflicted on Israel’s global standing since 2023, with the Iranian regime remaining fully intact despite months of joint military pressure. In a sharp rebuke of Israeli political culture, Harel added that Netanyahu would have already been forced to resign over these failures in any other democratic country, but Israel currently lacks any meaningful culture of political accountability for senior leaders.
This report was published by Middle East Eye, a media outlet that provides independent, in-depth coverage of the Middle East, North Africa and global affairs connected to the region.