The message about the ceasefire came from US President Donald Trump at night and was first confirmed during the early Tuesday morning by Israel and Iran.
The uncertainties during the night have made the situation difficult to interpret, according to Anders Persson, a political scientist at Linnaeus University. During the night, the Iranian attacks continued and the Israeli military claimed shortly after the ceasefire came into effect that missiles had been sent from Iran.
We have seen several waves of Iranian attacks on Israel during the early morning. It is not unusual just before a ceasefire comes into effect between Israel and its enemies, says Anders Persson.
For Iran, the night's attacks may have been a way to create a kind of victory narrative where the regime gets a "propaganda victory" by showing that they have hit Israel hard before the ceasefire.
Success for the US and Israel
Since Israel launched the attacks on Iran on June 13, it seems that intense negotiations have been underway, according to Anders Persson. On Monday evening, Iran attacked a US military base in Qatar where all missiles except one were shot down, according to Donald Trump. The attack is considered by many analysts to have been measured and can be interpreted as a de-escalation by Iran.
With Netanyahu's statement, Israel wants to present the ceasefire as a "great success" where they have removed a double existential threat in the form of nuclear threats and ballistic missiles.
Many experts doubt it and other experts mean that it is too early to say.
If the ceasefire is maintained, it is however a success for primarily the US, but also for Israel.
They come out of this strongly, strongly strengthened and Iran comes out of this strongly, strongly weakened. But whether the last word has been said or not remains to be seen, says Anders Persson.
The simplest form
The coming time may be very volatile where the US and Israel can decide to attack Iran again if the country resumes the nuclear program or uranium enrichment suspected by Israel and the US.
The ceasefire appears to be of the simplest form, so-called "calm for calm" which does not address any contentious issues, according to Anders Persson. The unclear grounds can also be due to the fact that the parties knew that they could not agree on the sharp questions.
There are no substantial issues that are addressed in it as I can see.
They are left to the future, he continues.
