The recent peace accord brokered by former U.S. President Donald Trump with Iran has left Israel isolated and vulnerable, as regional dynamics shift in ways that challenge longstanding strategic assumptions. The agreement, reached after a devastating conflict involving Iranian-backed Hezbollah forces in Lebanon, has elicited sharp criticism from Israeli officials and cautious recalibrations among Gulf states.

Israeli leaders and commentators have expressed outrage over what they perceive as a betrayal by Washington. The deal reportedly did not address Iran’s extensive ballistic missile program or its network of proxy militias, while allowing Tehran to retain highly enriched uranium stockpiles. Critics within Israel argue that the arrangement undermines efforts to contain Iranian influence across the region. “Trump came out a loser,” wrote Israeli commentator Yinon Migal, accusing U.S. negotiators Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff of abandoning Israeli interests and leaving the country “alone.”

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who gambled heavily on Trump’s support, faces mounting political challenges. Former Israel Defense Forces (IDF) officials highlight the country’s dependence on American backing for offensive and defensive capabilities, noting that Trump’s apparent fatigue with the conflict has left Israel to bear increasing costs. Netanyahu’s approach to Iran, including efforts to topple the regime, is now widely considered to have failed, complicating his standing ahead of elections slated before October. Opposition leaders have labeled the agreement a “total victory for the Ayatollah” and a profound failure of Israeli policy.

Israeli defense officials emphasize their intent to maintain a military presence in parts of Lebanon, Syria, and Gaza indefinitely, arguing these measures are necessary for national security despite external pressures. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir have called for continued resistance against Iran’s nuclear ambitions and rejected the notion that the peace deal constrains Israel’s sovereignty or freedom of action.

Meanwhile, Gulf states are reassessing their reliance on U.S. military support following the conflict. Countries such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates initially pushed for continued confrontation to weaken Iran but now face the reality of a more emboldened Tehran capable of threatening regional energy infrastructure. Saudi analyst Ali Shihabi described the war as exposing “the limited nature of America’s ability to protect,” signaling a broader shift toward diversifying alliances and exploring direct accommodations with Iran.

The deal underscores a potential shift in U.S. foreign policy, moving away from decades of seeking regime change through military or diplomatic means. While some analysts caution that American influence may reassert itself over the long term, the current consensus reflects a retreat from interventionist strategies that characterized previous administrations.

The details of Trump’s agreement remain partially undisclosed. Reports indicate forthcoming meetings between U.S. Vice President JD Vance and Iran’s chief negotiator Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf, further complicating Netanyahu’s position and underscoring the fragile and fluid geopolitical landscape. For Israel and its allies, the peace deal marks a critical juncture—redefining regional power calculations and exposing the limits of reliance on external guarantors of security.