Skip to content
You can now search across every topic, entity and event.What's new
Russia-Ukraine War 2026
19JUL

Israel rejects a deal it never signed

3 min read
13:35UTC

Netanyahu said Israel had been saved from annihilation, then admitted he had not read the memorandum's text. Ben-Gvir called it non-binding; Smotrich demanded Beirut demolitions; Gantz called the whole thing a strategic failure.

← Back to Fedorov sacked as the front stands stillJump to analysis ↓
ConflictDeveloping
Key takeaway

Israel's whole political spectrum rejected the memorandum, and none of the objectors carries a signature Geneva can bind.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told a press conference Israel had "saved itself from annihilation", then admitted in the same appearance that he had not seen the memorandum's text. 1 He confirmed Israeli forces would stay in southern Lebanon regardless of the deal. Israel signed nothing in Islamabad and is not a party to the instrument, yet its government spent the signing weekend rejecting terms it says it has not read.

The coalition went further than the prime minister. National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir posted that "Trump's agreement does not bind us in any way". Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich called for ten buildings in Beirut destroyed for every drone Hezbollah fires, extending the threat to Tyre, Sidon and the Bekaa. The objections were not confined to the right: opposition leader Benny Gantz, a former defence minister, called the deal a "strategic failure". 2

Trump had publicly threatened Netanyahu only days earlier over Israel's strike on the Karun field , so an Israeli repudiation of his memorandum reads as defiance in Washington as much as in Jerusalem. A ceasefire announced over a government that depends on ministers who reject any Lebanon withdrawal rests on whoever can compel Israel, and the one actor with that leverage has not used it.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Washington and Tehran signed the Islamabad MOU; Israel was excluded from the Islamabad negotiations and received no advance text before 15 June. But its terms affect Israel directly because Iran has armed and backed Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the MOU is supposed to bring all that fighting to an end. Netanyahu said on 15 June that Israel had 'saved itself from annihilation' but admitted he had not read the text. National Security Minister Ben-Gvir said the deal does not bind Israel. Finance Minister Smotrich called for ten Beirut buildings destroyed per Hezbollah drone. Opposition leader Gantz called it a strategic failure. Right and centre in Israel each rejected the same agreement, for different reasons.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

Netanyahu's coalition structure drives the MOU rejection pattern. Ben-Gvir's Otzma Yehudit (Jewish Power party) and Smotrich's Religious Zionism party together hold enough Knesset seats to collapse the government if Netanyahu implements a deal that withdraws IDF forces from Lebanon or Gaza. These parties ran on a platform of permanent IDF presence in occupied territory; accepting an MOU that even implies eventual withdrawal would trigger a coalition crisis.

Gantz's opposition rejection from the centre adds a different dimension: he left the emergency war cabinet in June 2025 and bases his objection on the deferred nuclear terms rather than coalition politics. Leaving 440.9 kg of HEU inside Iran under no inspection for 60 days is Gantz's stated grounds, a position that overlaps with Israeli security establishment concerns rather than settler ideology.

What could happen next?
  • Risk

    Smotrich's demand for ten Beirut buildings destroyed per Hezbollah drone, if acted on, would trigger the Lebanon violation clause Araghchi has already invoked, giving Iran legal cover to exit the MOU.

    Immediate · Assessed
  • Consequence

    Netanyahu's admission that he had not read the MOU text confirms Israel received no advance consultation; Washington must now decide whether to pressure Israel publicly or accept a deal its closest ally openly repudiates.

    Short term · Assessed
  • Risk

    Ben-Gvir's and Smotrich's public repudiation creates a political record that Netanyahu can cite domestically to justify non-compliance without formally withdrawing from a deal he never signed.

    Medium term · Suggested
Sources:The Hill
Mentions:Benjamin Netanyahu →Itamar Ben-Gvir →Israel Defense Forces (IDF) →Washington Institute for Near East Policy →Islamabad →Menachem Begin →Geneva →Iran →Lebanon →Egypt →Israel →Hezbollah →Beirut →Tyre →Washington →Sidon →Tehran →Bezalel Smotrich →Benny Gantz →Knesset →Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding →
First Reported In

Update #129 · Iran deal signed, but no paper to show

The Hill· 16 Jun 2026
Read original →
Causes and effects
Caused by
Hezbollah fired on Israel hours after signing
Israel's across-the-board rejection of the MOU coincided with Hezbollah combat that its own officials refused to halt.
Occurred 15 Jun 2026
Read story →
This Event
Israel rejects a deal it never signed
A ceasefire is being signed in Geneva over the head of the party still doing the fighting, with no Israeli signature anyone can hold.
Led to
Netanyahu sidelined by the deal on Iran
The 15 June cabinet rejections by Netanyahu, Ben-Gvir, Smotrich and Gantz escalated into broader Israeli and international commentary framing the MOU as a referendum on Netanyahu's tenure.
Occurred 16 Jun 2026
Read story →
Different Perspectives
The United Kingdom
The United Kingdom
Starmer pledged £300 million in Kyiv on 16 July toward Ukraine's Gripen E squadron, adding to the PURL expansion Trump and Rutte had announced two days earlier. London is paying into a scheme built around a shortfall NATO's own published $4bn-plus pledge does not close against Zelenskyy's roughly $15bn stated need.
Brussels
Brussels
The EU's 21st sanctions package missed its Coreper vote on 15 July over Greek LNG re-export rights and an Austrian bank compensation demand, the same week Hungary stalled accession clusters on procedure rather than veto. Both processes run on unanimity, so a single national interest, not Russia policy, sets the pace either can move at.
Hungary's Tisza government
Hungary's Tisza government
Budapest refused to open EU accession Clusters 2 and 3 for Ukraine at COELA on 17 July, offering Moldova a standalone opening instead, and the question returns on 22 July. Having ended Orbán's blanket loan veto in May, it now blocks the narrower rule-of-law chapters where its own electorate is least comfortable.
Washington
Washington
Trump and Rutte expanded PURL on 14 July, letting allies fund the American interceptors and jets Washington will license but no longer gift outright. The same week, Lockheed Martin told allies it cannot guarantee PAC-3 MSE delivery timelines even after tripling output, so Washington now shapes Ukraine's air defence through a supply queue rather than a donation decision.
Moscow
Moscow
Novak ordered a study into cutting the diesel exchange quota to 10% within a week of his export ban, while June delivered Russia's first budget surplus of 2026 and National Wealth Fund liquidity above its own May forecast. Its own investors disagree: the Moscow Exchange has fallen for its longest losing streak since 1997.
Ukraine's government and its street protesters
Ukraine's government and its street protesters
Zelenskyy sacked Fedorov on 15 July, installed an acting SBU officer in his place, and did not move against three days of protest that followed across eight cities. He is betting that visible tolerance for dissent, timed to EU accession hearings on rule of law, outweighs whatever command dispute forced the reshuffle.