After over a year of political stalemate, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his main political rival, Benny Gantz, have signed a coalition agreement, saving Israel from a fourth election in less than two years. The new government will be supported by about 70 of the 120 members of the Knesset, which might bring stability not found in razor-thin majorities. According to the terms of the agreement, Netanyahu will hold onto the premiership for eighteen months, after which Gantz will have his turn. Shmuel Rosner comments on the other details:

[Gantz] agreed that Netanyahu could initiate annexation of parts of Judea and Samaria in the early summer. . . . Netanyahu wants [annexation], but also understand that there are risks involved. He will not make a final decision until the actual time comes. If circumstances allow—the coronavirus crisis, relations with the Trump administration, and other factors—Israel might be on track to annex parts of the West Bank.

The debate concerning the legal system and its responsibilities was one of the main stumbling blocks during the [most recent] round of negotiations. Within Likud there are people who believe that the time has come for reforming this system. [Gantz took the opposite position.] Ultimately, the parties reached a compromise for a simple reason: Netanyahu never made the fight against the court his highest priority. In fact, for many years he was one of the most conservative leaders within Likud when it comes to the court. Similarly, Gantz is not fully convinced that all of the complaints against the legal system are completely off the mark. This was more a fight over pretense than content.

But, Rosner concludes, the most important outcome is that Israel won’t have a fourth election, and will get a much-needed reprieve from political chaos.

Early Friday morning, Israel attacked military installations near the Iranian cities of Isfahan and nearby Natanz, the latter being one of the hubs of the country’s nuclear program. Jerusalem is not taking credit for the attack, and none of the details are too certain, but it seems that the attack involved multiple drones, likely launched from within Iran, as well as one or more missiles fired from Syrian or Iraqi airspace. Strikes on Syrian radar systems shortly beforehand probably helped make the attack possible, and there were reportedly strikes on Iraq as well.

Iran itself is downplaying the attack, but the S-300 air-defense batteries in Isfahan appear to have been destroyed or damaged. This is a sophisticated Russian-made system positioned to protect the Natanz nuclear installation. In other words, Israel has demonstrated that Iran’s best technology can’t protect the country’s skies from the IDF. As Yossi Kuperwasser puts it, the attack, combined with the response to the assault on April 13,

clarified to the Iranians that whereas we [Israelis] are not as vulnerable as they thought, they are more vulnerable than they thought. They have difficulty hitting us, but we have no difficulty hitting them.

Nobody knows exactly how the operation was carried out. . . . It is good that a question mark hovers over . . . what exactly Israel did. Let’s keep them wondering. It is good for deniability and good for keeping the enemy uncertain.

The fact that we chose targets that were in the vicinity of a major nuclear facility but were linked to the Iranian missile and air forces was a good message. It communicated that we can reach other targets as well but, as we don’t want escalation, we chose targets nearby that were involved in the attack against Israel. I think it sends the message that if we want to, we can send a stronger message. Israel is not seeking escalation at the moment.