News of the ceasefire announced by President Trump reached me at 01:30 this morning as my family and I huddled in the saferoom of our home and awaited the interception over Jerusalem of an Iranian missile. Whether the ceasefire will end in two weeks as planned and what will follow is an open question, but it is foolhardy to believe that a new day has dawned.

The IDF is maintaining a state of both defensive and offensive readiness, yet the airport authority has stated that it will restart operations early Thursday, and local authorities are planning to reopen schools in the coming days. At the same time, the IDF is engaged in its most intensive operations against Hezbollah since the current round of fighting began and Tehran is threatening to retaliate against Israel. So, with the boom of last night’s rocket interception still within memory, we are living in a state of tentativeness and dissonance here and I am wary: Nothing seems to have changed, and we are leaving the safe room of our home prepared. Even if the ceasefire runs its course, two weeks seems like it will be little more than a respite. What lies ahead is unclear.

No doubt, the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Axis of Resistance have been dealt grievous blows and their ability to strike Israel — in the short run — has been sharply curtailed. Yet, they are still able to make our lives miserable with their existing stockpiles of conventional weapons, even if the nuclear threat has been distanced. That the full brunt of our military might has been displayed will no doubt serve is a deterrent to any regional or other actor that intended to harm us. But it will likely also trigger an arms race, so how does it fundamentally change things? After all, one should go to war only when it is necessary to undo an insufferable situation and lead to a better one.

We have lived under the threat of the Islamic Republic and its regional proxies for more than forty years. The decisive removal of that threat require the fall of the ayatollah regime. Given the predatory nature of the Islamic Republic, military force is indispensable to that objective, but it is an insufficient condition for its achievement. Ultimately, regime change requires a popular uprising, hopefully followed by a peaceful orderly transition to democracy.

Regrettably, the two men leading the charge, President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu may have succeeded (for now) on the battlefield, but they failed to note a critical component: The unlikelihood that a popular uprising of ordinary Iranians would take place scarcely two months after tens of thousands of ordinary Iranians, encouraged in January by President Trump’s assurance that “help is on the way,” were gunned down because that support never came. The failure then to provide a protective umbrella for those brave Iranians left them to face the Basij thugs and hanging judges of Iran’s judiciary alone. It was unreasonable to assume that they would walk back into the line of fire so soon afterwards.

Prime Minister Netanyahu should have noted that that window of opportunity had, unfortunately, closed and delayed Operation Roaring Lion until a more opportune time. The timing he chose, giving the political and judicial challenges he faces, is suspect. Israelis are a resilient nation, but we are a small one making the best of difficult circumstances. Our defense forces rely on civilian reserves who are critical to the life of the nation in and out of uniform. After three years of internal divisiveness, and more than two years of warfare, it would have been far wiser to await an opportunity where we could have struck hard and fast under optimum conditions (including when the Iranian people ready to participate) rather than forcing millions of us into shelters day and night for more than 40 days with results that are at best, indecisive and the northern front still aflame.

Lamentably, we have no choice but to use military might to survive in a violence-prone region, but armed force alone resolves nothing. The prime minister and the electorate he cultivates may believe that the use of armed force is inevitable and the only tool that will get us by in this fraught region, but this is an unsustainable strategy that erodes our stamina, spirit and wellbeing. Israel has much to offer our neighbors, and such soft power and a willingness to engage and resolve issues through negotiations, backed up by strong security capabilities, when that is an option, is the only rational road ahead. Since the prime minister and his government consistently reject this approach, the Israeli public must make their voices heard at the ballot box to elect a new leadership capable of bringing us to more promising waters.

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)