Iran Resumes War on Israel as Trump Equivocates

Iran resumed ballistic missile attacks on Israel on June 7 for the first time since agreeing to a U.S.-brokered ceasefire two months ago. Despite President Donald Trump’s public calls for restraint, Israel quickly retaliated.

While the immediate crisis subsided within 24 hours, the underlying danger remains: Tehran has threatened further attacks in defense of Hezbollah, its Lebanese terror proxy, while Trump’s public hesitation has exposed an unnecessary rift between Washington and Jerusalem.

Beirut Blowback

Iran launched roughly 30 ballistic missiles at northern Israel, the Tel Aviv area, and parts of the West Bank, claiming it was in retaliation for an Israeli strike on Hezbollah command facilities in Beirut’s Dahiyeh district. Israel had targeted those sites after Hezbollah launched rockets at northern Israeli communities across the border.

The barrage marked Iran’s first direct attack on Israel since the April 8 ceasefire, an arrangement that has increasingly frayed amid the failure to secure a broader agreement with Tehran.

Trump publicly urged Israel not to respond, declaring that he alone “calls all the shots” in the conflict. Israel nonetheless ignored the warning and launched two waves of strikes against Iranian air defense systems and a petrochemical facility reportedly linked to missile production.

Following Trump’s appeal for de-escalation, Iran announced an end to its attacks but threatened that any further Israeli “aggression” — including operations against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon — would trigger renewed missile fire.

Israel sustained limited damage and no significant casualties, though millions of civilians were forced into shelters. Schools closed, hospitals reopened underground emergency wards, and reserve forces were mobilized. Ben Gurion Airport remained open despite several foreign carriers suspending service.

Israel’s Military Autonomy

The IRGC claimed Israel used ballistic missiles in its retaliation — likely a reference to air-launched, long-range precision weapons capable of striking Iran without traversing Jordanian or Saudi airspace. If so, Israel deliberately minimized the risk of dragging U.S.-aligned Arab states into the conflict.

The United States did not participate in Israel’s retaliatory strikes on Iran, a distinction that helped Washington preserve the credibility of its diplomatic outreach to Tehran.

But Trump went further than preserving diplomatic flexibility. He publicly sought to restrain an ally responding to a direct Iranian attack — echoing past efforts to limit Israeli responses to Hezbollah provocations.

Rather than indulging Tehran’s demand that Hezbollah be effectively shielded by the ceasefire process, Washington should make clear that Lebanon is not part of the negotiation. Hezbollah is a U.S.-designated terrorist organization that has killed, maimed, and kidnapped Americans. The United States has no troops fighting alongside Israel in Lebanon. What it does have is a government in Beirut that quietly hopes Israel succeeds in weakening Hezbollah’s grip on the country.

A successful end to the war with Iran requires keeping the focus on Tehran. Allowing the regime to shift the conversation from its own aggression to its determination to protect Hezbollah only rewards escalation and invites further conflict.

As successive administrations should have learned, public daylight between Washington and Jerusalem rarely advances American interests. More often, it emboldens the very forces the United States seeks to contain.

Mark Dubowitz is the CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD). For more analysis from Mark and FDD, please subscribe HERE. Follow Mark on X @mdubowitz. Follow FDD on X @FDD. FDD is a Washington, DC-based, nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.