Senior Israeli officials have acknowledged that the war’s outcome fell short of expectations, with one official admitting it “wouldn’t have been worth fighting” had its political endgame been known in advance, as new details reveal deep divisions over the timing of a strike on Beirut’s southern suburb (Dahiyeh).
“If Israel had known the war would end this way, from a political standpoint, it certainly wouldn’t have been worth fighting,” i24 NEWS quoted senior Israeli official as saying.
Meanwhile, Yedioth Ahronoth reported, citing sources that the recent Israeli attack on Dahiyeh was ordered by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yisrael Katz despite explicit warnings from senior military leaders about the risk of triggering an Iranian ballistic missile response.
Israeli army launches strike on Beirut's southern suburb (Dahiyeh)
— Al-Manar English (@manarenglish) June 14, 2026
Al-Manar correspondent reports the strike targeted a residential building in Ghobeiry pic.twitter.com/qhp9Zy4a6d
Sources said top officials urged delaying the strike by several days, anticipating that a US-Iran agreement might be reached imminently—potentially rendering the operation strategically irrelevant or politically costly. Objections from the Israeli military reportedly focused not on the target itself but on the timing, as the region stood on the brink of a major diplomatic breakthrough.
Internal assessments warned the attack could act as a “political and military mine” in the path of the emerging agreement, provoking escalation rather than altering its course. Instead of derailing diplomacy, however, the strike appears to have had the opposite effect.
A security source said Netanyahu had hoped the operation would push negotiations toward collapse or confrontation, but developments on the ground instead accelerated momentum toward an agreement backed strongly by US President Donald Trump.
The Yedioth Ahronoth report also suggests Netanyahu sought to manage domestic fallout by directing public discourse toward framing the escalation as limited to Lebanon, emphasizing a separation between the Lebanese front and the broader Iran file. Yet another source indicated the underlying objective was to “launch an attack on the agreement” itself by heightening tensions.
Despite these attempts, Israeli officials now believe Netanyahu has lost leverage over US policy, with one assessment concluding he is unable to block a deal the Israeli leadership views as dangerous.
The outcome, according to the report, underscores a widening gap between Israeli political leadership and strategic realities, with the confrontation ending in what some described as Washington imposing its will—leaving Netanyahu politically weakened and the agreement moving forward.
“Netanyahu appeared to be in a difficult position, having spent the past three weeks trying to redefine the rules of engagement with Hezbollah and demonstrate that he does not submit to Trump,” one source said.
However, according to the newspaper, “everything ended with Trump imposing his will and inflicting further humiliation on Netanyahu.”
Source: Hebrew media (translated and edited by Al-Manar)