Five Lessons from the (Second) Iran War

It looks like the Second Iran War is about to end, and since neither the Iranian nor Hezbollah threats have been removed, it is widely understood that a third war is only a matter of time. Hence, it makes perfect sense to learn the right lessons - ensuring that policymakers in both Israel and the United States do better next time.

Wars have a way of stripping away illusions and exposing hard truths: the limits of power, the risks of poor planning, and the toxic effects of politics in the Situation Room.

As liberals, we believe war is hell - yet we do not ignore the world as it is. Here are five clear-sighted lessons that can prevent the next crisis - or at least minimize its costs.

Wars are exposing hard truths: the limits of power, the risks of poor planning, and the toxic effects of politics in the Situation Room.

1. If You Begin a War, Know How to End It

“Exit strategy” isn’t a dirty phrase, and it is definitely not a sign of weakness or defeatism, as some government supporters claim. It is an acknowledgment of war’s nature: a tragic, last-resort tool to achieve political ends. Wars should not be driven by hate, and are not meant to last forever.

Leadership that enters a war without knowing how it should end is gambling with soldiers’ lives, citizens’ security, and long-term prosperity. While history teaches us that many wars begin without a clear endgame - from Vietnam to Iraq to Iron Swords - it is all the more important to learn from that history rather than repeat it.

The early days of this war showed what happens when leaders make bold opening moves but cannot articulate the finish line: the war drags on, the human and economic costs rise, and both domestic and international support collapse.

The Gaza War. History teaches us that many wars begin without a clear endgame, hence it is all the more important to learn from that history rather than repeat it.

2. Make Sure Everyone Understands Why You’re Fighting

Nothing erodes support faster than a war whose purpose is unclear. Citizens grow anxious, allies grow skeptical, and adversaries grow bold. In this war, Israeli citizens were ready to make sacrifices - until it became clear that the stated objective of “toppling the regime,” however desirable, was not achievable.

Israeli citizens were ready to make sacrifices - until it became clear that the stated objective of “toppling the regime” was not achievable.

American citizens, meanwhile, opposed the war from the start, hearing confused and contradictory explanations: from “securing Iran’s oil,” to “removing the ballistic threat,” to “Israel dragged us into it.”

Democracies win wars because they justify them. Government clarity is not just a matter of accountability, but a strategic asset.

3. Define a Realistic, Achievable Objective

In an NGO management course I took, we were taught that objectives must be SMART: specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound. It seems that Israel’s and America’s leaders would benefit from that lesson - especially when it comes to the “A.”

Amit Segal's Telegram post, declaring the war's objectives: "toppling the regime, destroying the nuclear weapons, destroying the missile threat"

A war without an achievable objective is a recipe for failure. Wish lists do not work in reality. On the first day of the war, Israeli journalist and Netanyahu ally Amit Segal outlined three maximalist objectives: destroying Iran’s nuclear program, dismantling its missile capabilities, and toppling the regime. While all are desirable, they were never aligned with reality - not with Israel’s or even America’s resources, not with the region’s economic dynamics (particularly Iran’s leverage over Hormuz), and not with Washington’s political timeline.

When governments set objectives they cannot meet, they inevitably shift the goalposts mid-conflict - leaving citizens not just disappointed, but feeling misled.

4. Leave Politics Out

Wars demand unity, not uniformity. Leaders must resist the urge to campaign from the Situation Room.

Soldiers go to war should know they risk their lives for worthy goals. No matter what, wartime decisions - essentially life-and-death decisions - must never be made for partisan or personal gain. In the early days of the war, too many Israeli politicians and activists who support the government rushed to claim credit, trade compliments, mock their rivals, demand public gratitude, and praise Netanyahu and Trump. This is not just ugly - it is dangerous. It risks further eroding Israel’s already fragile social cohesion, and that's true for any democracy under strain.

Wars demand unity, not uniformity. Leaders must resist the urge to campaign from the Situation Room. Instead, they should project responsibility, publicly denounce petty politics, and seriously engage with the concerns of their critics.

5. Don’t Drag Your Friends Into Your Fights

While Iran is indeed a threat to the United States, it is a far greater and more immediate threat to Israel - and therefore primarily Israel’s responsibility to confront.

For decades, Israel’s partnership with the United States has been strong and resilient, grounded in a core Israeli principle born from the lessons of the Holocaust: to defend itself, by itself.

Netanyahu’s alleged attempt (as reported by the New York Times) to draw the United States into this war may have yielded short-term gains, but it undermined that principle. LIBRAEL opposed American involvement from the outset: American soldiers have never been expected to risk their lives for Israel. While Iran is indeed a threat to the United States, it is a far greater and more immediate threat to Israel - and therefore primarily Israel’s responsibility to confront.

Israeli fighter jets and an American B52 bomber. What is the value of fighting shoulder to shoulder with Israel if Israel is perceived as the reason for entering the war in the first place?

When allies feel maneuvered into conflicts they did not choose - and when opposition grows, as it did in the United States - they begin to question the partnership itself. What is the value of fighting shoulder to shoulder with Israel if Israel is perceived as the reason for entering the war in the first place?

America is Israel’s greatest strategic asset, a cornerstone of its national security - but only if Israel treats Washington as a true partner, not an automatic extension of its policies.

Conclusion

If this war has shown anything, it is that strategy matters. Power has limits, and ignoring them leads to crisis; over-submitting to them leads to paralysis. Israel must navigate between these two.

The Second Iran War should serve as a wake-up call: we cannot afford to stumble from one war to another, hoping that tactical successes will compensate for the absence of strategic planning. The only way to honor those already paying the price of this war is to ensure we learn its lessons before the next one arrives.

---

If you liked this article, that means you share our vision and values. You can help us live up to the urgent task we’ve taken upon ourselves by donating to LIBRAEL here. For tax-deductible donations in the United States, click here.