Israel left out of Iran deal, Netanyahu under fire at home

For Serbia, which has spent years balancing ties with both Washington and players across the Middle East, the new agreement between the United States and Iran is not a distant story: it shows how quickly even a close ally can be cut out of decisions that affect it directly. Israel’s government says it was never shown the text of the memorandum of understanding, even though US President Donald Trump publicly stated that he had forwarded a copy. This is an agreement that Israeli officials describe as a strategic and political defeat, and one that deepens tensions with Washington just as Benjamin Netanyahu is already deep into an election campaign.

The day itself told the story. While Trump announced and signed the document, Netanyahu stayed silent. That silence, unusual for a prime minister who has spent years cultivating the image of an indispensable interlocutor for the White House, only reinforced the sense that Jerusalem had been sidelined. An Israeli official said the memorandum of understanding was not shown to the Israeli side, raising the question of how coordinated the US-Israeli relationship really is in practice, rather than only in public statements.

Why is Netanyahu under fire at home too?

Reactions inside Israel were swift and blunt. Former Prime Minister Ehud Barak said Israel was paying the price for Netanyahu’s arrogance and blindness, placing responsibility squarely on the sitting prime minister. Opposition leader Yair Lapid went further, calling the deal one of the most shocking failures of Israeli foreign and security policy. When language this sharp comes from both the left and the right of the political map, it is clear this is not routine campaign sparring but a broader feeling that the country was caught off guard.

The political arithmetic sharpens the moment. Israel’s elections are scheduled for the fall of 2026, roughly four months away, and Netanyahu enters the campaign with the story of a deal struck without him and around him. For a prime minister who built his career on a hard line toward Tehran, the perception that Iran secured an agreement with Washington while Israel was left without sight of the text is a heavy burden. The opposition sees an opening, while part of his own base sees a betrayal of earlier promises.

What exactly does the deal demand of Israel?

The content of the document complicates Netanyahu’s position further. The agreement requires Israel to halt military operations in Lebanon, touching one of the most sensitive security questions for the Israeli public and the military leadership. Halting operations in Lebanon is no technical clause: it changes how Israel responds to threats from its northern border and limits the prime minister’s room to project force, precisely when such an image is most useful to him politically.

For Washington, the deal is part of a wider effort to reduce the risk of a new war in the Middle East. For Jerusalem, it raises questions about the reliability of its most important ally and the limits of its own influence. If it is confirmed that the memorandum was indeed not shared with the Israeli side before signing, it will be hard to restore the sense of equal partnership that Netanyahu has nurtured for years. The coming week, when the first detailed Israeli responses and possible clarifications from the White House are expected, will show whether this is a temporary misunderstanding or a lasting chill.

Do you think Netanyahu can turn this defeat into election momentum, or is the Iran deal the beginning of his political end?