The United States has conveyed a message to Israel that it would be advisable to wait a few days to see whether an agreement can be reached.
Contrary to the heated atmosphere, there is no immediate necessity to strike in response to the Iranian missile fire toward northern Israel. Such a response could also be limited in scope, since a significant operation would first require addressing Iran’s air defense systems.
Discussions are currently taking place in Israel, with the main question being whether to wait and, if so, for how long. The prevailing assessment is that Iran will harden its stance in the negotiations. Another option under consideration is a covert strike in response to the missile fire.
Regarding Lebanon, U.S. President Donald Trump was correct in saying that the strike was not coordinated with him personally. However, notice was given to the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), and no message was received opposing the operation. Instead, there appeared to be understanding of the move.
From Israel’s perspective, however, refraining from any response to Iran could undermine deterrence and signal that Israel is no longer able to act in its own defense according to the judgment of its political leadership.
A similar situation arose during the 1991 Gulf War, when Iraq fired Scud missiles at Israeli cities and the IDF had already prepared an operation in western Iraq. But then-U.S. President George H. W. Bush demanded that Israel refrain from acting in order to preserve the coalition, which included Arab states. Israel complied. The move was later widely viewed as politically wise, but also as one that damaged Israeli deterrence.