In his first public remarks since Washington and Tehran unveiled a framework to end their direct military confrontation, Benjamin Netanyahu declared on Monday that he will contest Israel’s forthcoming elections and intends to win. The veteran prime minister, already the country’s longest-serving leader, used a televised press conference to cast the joint US-Israeli campaign against Iran as an existential triumph. “We saved the State of Israel from the threat of nuclear annihilation,” he said, insisting that millions of citizens had been delivered from “terrible danger of mass death.” The statement, reported across Israeli, Latin American, European and Asian media, signals an early effort to shape the political narrative around a deal that has stirred deep unease within his own security establishment.

Netanyahu was careful to frame the agreement not as a conclusion but as a pause. “The confrontation is not over,” he warned, vowing that Israeli forces would remain in Gaza, Lebanon and Syria “for as long as necessary” and that Iran would be denied a nuclear weapon “with or without an accord.” He acknowledged tactical differences with President Donald Trump, likening the bilateral relationship to a marriage in which partners do not always see eye to eye, yet he credited the administration’s military pressure for bringing Tehran to the table. Viewed from Washington, the deal represents a diplomatic off-ramp after months of escalating strikes; from Jerusalem, however, Netanyahu’s rhetoric suggests a leader determined to claim credit for the coercion while hedging against any perception of concession.

The electoral announcement comes at a moment of acute domestic vulnerability. Netanyahu, who has led Israel through three years of interconnected wars since Hamas’s October 2023 attack, faces a corruption trial and mounting opposition accusations that he has failed to achieve the war aims he himself set. Critics argue that the ceasefire leaves Iran’s regional proxies—Hezbollah in Lebanon, militias in Syria, and Hamas remnants in Gaza—battered but intact, and that the nuclear threat, while postponed, has not been dismantled. Analysts in London note that the prime minister’s re-election bid will test whether an Israeli public exhausted by prolonged conflict and polarised by his legal troubles is willing to reward a security-first message that blends triumphalism with foreboding.

Regional perspectives underscore the fragility of the moment. In Tehran, the deal is being presented as a victory for national resilience, a narrative that could bolster hardliners if economic sanctions are not swiftly eased. Arab capitals, meanwhile, view the ceasefire with cautious relief, aware that unresolved tensions over Iran’s nuclear ambitions and its proxy network could reignite at any time. Netanyahu’s insistence on maintaining forward-deployed troops and new security zones suggests that Israel’s multi-front posture will persist, potentially straining the very agreement he now celebrates.

Looking ahead, the prime minister’s electoral fate may hinge on whether the ceasefire holds and whether his portrayal of strategic salvation resonates beyond his traditional base. The corruption proceedings, which have already eroded his standing among centrist voters, will run in parallel with the campaign. Should the Iran deal unravel or proxy attacks resume, Netanyahu’s claim to have averted annihilation could quickly give way to accusations of a premature peace. For now, he is betting that a war-weary nation will see in his defiance the safest path forward—a calculation that will be tested in the months to come.