By Jamal I. Bittar

Last Friday, Israel launched an assault on Iran in response to an Iranian incursion onto Israeli soil the weekend prior, involving over 300 missiles and drones. Among the various options available to the Israeli government – ranging from assaults on numerous nuclear facilities, military bases and key national infrastructure, to cyberattacks and targeted killings – it opted for the approach least likely to escalate tensions, a targeted strike on Isfahan. This serves as a temporary measure, but ultimately has no impact.

Netanyahu, who has long emphasized the Iranian threat to build his political career, found himself with little to show when the critical moment arrived. The Iranian goverment shifted its approach, opting for a direct assault instead of operating through proxies, catching Netanyahu and the intelligence community off guard. His decades-long strategy was unprepared for such a development. Although he may have had the final say in this latest significant confrontation, the so-called grand geopolitical strategist has been revealed as nothing more than a bluffer, offering Israel nothing but hollow rhetoric.

For years, Netanyahu’s addresses at the United Nations General Assembly, threatening a unilateral strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, were essentially a bluff from the start. This maneuver was designed to coerce previous U.S. administrations into imposing severe sanctions on Iran. Similarly, Netanyahu’s reluctance to outline a post-Gaza plan reflects his lack of preparation for Iran’s recent defiance, leaving him in a weakened position both domestically and internationally.

Rather than hastily plunging into a new conflict with Iran, Netanyahu’s government ought to reflect on the lessons learned from their failures during the past six months of war.

The policies pursued by Netanyahu and his political allies over the years have brought Israel dangerously close to destruction. Despite their past mistakes, they have displayed no remorse and seem unwilling to alter course. If they persist in shaping policy, they risk dragging the entire Middle East into catastrophe. Rather than hastily plunging into a new conflict with Iran, Netanyahu’s government ought to reflect on the lessons learned from Israel’s failures during the past six months of war.

Israel has yet to meet its stated goals. Many hostages remain in captivity, Hamas remains undefeated and there’s been no progress in pushing Hezbollah forces from the northern border. Tens of thousands of Israelis, both from the north and south, continue to live as refugees in other parts of Israel. Moreover, Israel’s actions have led to a deliberate humanitarian crisis affecting 2.3 million Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, eroding both the moral and geopolitical foundations of Israel’s existence.

Israel has yet to meet its stated goals. hostages remain in captivity, Hamas remains undefeated and Hezbollah forces continue their attacks in the north. Tens of thousands of Israelis from the north and south are refugees and Netanyahu and his right wing government created a humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

Israel’s international reputation has suffered significantly, and it now faces widespread contempt and scorn, even from many previous allies. As the situation in Gaza unfolds, more and more of its partners are expressing shock and are advocating for an immediate ceasefire and, in some cases, even a weapons embargo against Israel. The Netanyahu government has even jeopardized its relationship with the United States, seemingly without considering the implications of losing its primary source of military and diplomatic support. Without American arms and funding, the best-case scenario for Israel could be like becoming the North Korea of the Middle East.

Young people in the United States and across the globe increasingly view Israel as a country that engages in racist and violent practices.

Young people in the United States and across the globe increasingly view Israel as a country that engages in racist and violent practices, including the expulsion of millions, the starvation of entire populations and the killing of thousands of civilians in acts perceived as vengeful. The repercussions of these actions are likely to be profound, extending not just into the immediate future but for decades to come.

Israel’s growing global isolation and the increasing animosity directed towards it from academics, artists and young people stems not just from the recent conflict in Gaza, but also from the policies and priorities shaped by Netanyahu over the past 15 years. Under Netanyahu’s leadership, a discriminatory perspective has been nurtured among many Israelis, leading to a devaluation of Palestinian lives. This perspective has been consistently reinforced by Netanyahu and his allies, contributing significantly to the current tensions and perceptions. Rather than fostering these alliances and partnerships, Netanyahu opted for a path driven by blind rage as his war strategy. His embrace of fundamentalism, fascism and narrow-mindedness, coupled with his belief in the myth of an Israel determined to assert its dominance in the region and the world, reveal a landlord who has completely abandoned reason.

Netanyahu keeps assuring Israelis of “total victory”, but he is teetering on the brink of total defeat. Believing that a single additional victory, such as in Rafah, will lead to the collapse of Hamas, the release of all hostages and the defeat of Israel’s numerous adversaries is a dangerous delusion. Each additional day of conflict only deepens Israel’s international isolation.

The Netanyahu administration, plagued by numerous failures, must now take the wrapping off the mirror and face reality. At this critical juncture, it must acknowledge its shortcomings, withstand the unbearable and promptly resign to pave the way for fresh leadership. Establishing a new government, driven by a distinct moral compass, is essential. Such leadership would prioritize resolving the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and initiate dialogue towards a Palestinian state.

— Jamal I. Bittar is a professor at the University of Toledo.