Benjamin Netanyahu’s end game in the war against Iran is shaped by Israel’s long standing security concerns. Iran is seen not just as a rival state but as the central force behind the Axis of Resistance, which includes groups like Hezbollah and Hamas that directly threaten Israeli security. Netanyahu’s objective is to weaken or dismantle this network and reestablish deterrence. To achieve this, Israel has extended its “mowing the grass” strategy beyond non state actors to Iran itself, focusing on degrading leadership, military capabilities, and infrastructure rather than seeking a permanent resolution.
Divergence from US Strategy
Israel’s objectives differ significantly from those of the United States under Donald Trump. While Israel prioritizes eliminating threats even at the cost of regional instability, the United States has traditionally focused on maintaining stability in the Persian Gulf, particularly ensuring the uninterrupted flow of oil through key routes like the Strait of Hormuz. This strategic mismatch complicates coordination and creates uncertainty about how the war will ultimately be concluded.
Domestic Political Calculations
The war also serves Netanyahu’s internal political interests. Following the 2023 Hamas attacks, his reputation as Israel’s security guarantor was weakened. The ongoing conflict allows him to rebuild his image as a strong wartime leader ahead of elections. Continued military engagement strengthens his political standing and helps consolidate support. At the same time, remaining in power is personally significant due to his ongoing legal challenges, making the continuation of the war politically advantageous.
Short Term Gains
In the short term, Netanyahu benefits from appearing decisive and strong. The war shifts public attention away from domestic criticism and toward national security concerns. Military operations against Iran and its allies also create a perception of progress, which can translate into electoral support if sustained.
Long Term Strategic Risks
Despite these gains, the long term risks are serious. Iran and its allies do not need to win militarily to claim success. Simply surviving against a stronger adversary can strengthen their legitimacy and resolve. The killing of Ali Khamenei has further intensified this dynamic, transforming the conflict into a more ideological struggle and potentially producing a more radicalized leadership. Instead of weakening Iran, the war may harden its position.
Regional Instability
The conflict also risks expanding instability across the region. Israeli actions in places like Lebanon and against Iran may achieve tactical success but can fuel long term hostility and cycles of retaliation. This increases the likelihood of a prolonged and wider conflict rather than a decisive end.
Declining International Support
International backing for Israel is showing signs of erosion, particularly in the United States and Europe. Legal scrutiny from institutions such as the International Criminal Court and shifting public opinion could further isolate Israel. This is significant because Israel relies heavily on US military and financial support, which may not remain unconditional.
Analytical Interpretation
From a neorealist perspective, Netanyahu’s strategy reflects a pursuit of security through power maximization. However, this creates a security dilemma. Israel’s attempts to increase its security by weakening Iran provoke counter responses from Iran, leading to further escalation. Iran compensates for its conventional weaknesses through asymmetric strategies, including influence over regional networks and leverage over the Strait of Hormuz. As a result, tactical military success does not necessarily translate into long term strategic stability.
Final Evaluation
Netanyahu’s end game represents a high risk gamble. While the strategy may deliver short term military and political gains, it could leave Iran more resilient and emboldened, deepen regional instability, and increase Israel’s international isolation. Instead of eliminating threats, the war may transform them into more complex and dangerous forms, potentially making Israel less secure in the long run despite its immediate advantages.
With information from Reuters.
