Two new polls of Jewish voters released this week show broad opposition to the U.S. military action against Iran, with support for the operation highest among those who are the most connected to Israel and those who are most affiliated with Jewish institutions.

A Mellman Group poll on behalf of the Jewish Electoral Institute (JEI)found that 32% of Jewish voters back the current military action against Iran, while 55% disapprove and  13% remain undecided. Support tracked closely along partisan lines, with 83% of Republicans, 49% of independents and 13% of Democrats approving the war. 

Among those who said they were very connected to Israel, the poll found nearly two-thirds of Jewish respondents supportive, with just 27% opposed. But among those only “somewhat” connected to Israel, 58% said they disapprove of the war with just 25% approving. Nearly all of those Jewish respondents unconnected to Israel said they disapprove of the military action against Iran.

Support also was strongest based on those who are more religiously observant. The vast majority of Orthodox Jews (83%) approve of President Donald Trump’s military action, with just 11% opposing. But among Conservative Jews, opinion is more evenly split, with 40% approving and 48% disapproving. And among Reform Jews, support is the lowest, with just 24% approving and 67% disapproving.  

There’s also a pronounced gender divide within the Jewish community: 40% of Jewish men support the military action against Iran, with 49% opposing. But among women, only 26% approve of the war in Iran, with 59% opposing. 

The poll also found a significant share of Jewish Democrats (28%) and independents (29%) who said they feel “torn” about the war — agreeing that Iran is a threat to peace but disagreeing with Trump’s handling of the operation. 

The “torn” constituency, which makes up 23% of the Jewish vote, generally draws from those who said they were opposed to the war in the end. When the “torn” constituency is broken out, there’s a more even divide between those who support the war (31%) and those who oppose it (41%). 

The Mellman Group poll surveyed 800 Jewish voters between March 13-22.

A separate poll of Jewish voters, conducted by GBAO for the progressive Israel advocacy group J Street, found a similar response towards the war in Iran: A 60% majority of Jewish voters disapprove of U.S. military action against Iran, while 40% support the war. Of note: A sizable 20% minority of Jewish Kamala Harris voters expressed support for Trump’s military action. 

The J Street poll, notably, found higher support for the war among Conservative Jews, with 62% supporting and 38% opposing. It also found moderate Jews nearly evenly split, with 51% of self-described moderates in support, and 49% opposed. 

The survey also asked whether U.S. military action makes Israel more or less secure, and found a 45% plurality agreeing that it helped Israel’s defense, with 36% concluding it made Israel less safe. But a 58% majority also said that the war weakened the United States, with only 30% believing it strengthened American national security. 

The J Street poll also found that 77% of Jews don’t think Trump has a clear plan and mission for the war in Iran. 

And it found that 70% of Jewish respondents said their sympathies are more with the Israelis, with 30% expressing more sympathy with the Palestinians. Asked about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, 28% of Jewish respondents said they viewed him favorably, with 66% viewing him unfavorably.

Jewish Israelis’ support for the war against Iran dropped by 15 points from the first week of the war, according to a poll released by the Israel Democracy Institute on Monday.

In the first week of the war, 93% of Jewish Israelis supported continuing the war, while in the latest IDI poll — conducted nearly a month into the war — 78% support it. More than twice as many Israeli Jews (11.5%) oppose the war as did at the beginning of March (4%).

As at the start of the war, only a minority of Arab Israelis are in favor of it, with their support dropping from 26% to 19%.

Most Israelis said Iran was more resilient than anticipated, with 56% of Jewish Israelis and 51% of Arab Israelis answering in the affirmative.

Most Jewish Israelis (62%) said that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched Operation Roaring Lion against Iran for strategic and security-related reasons, while most Arab Israelis (55%) said he was motivated by personal and political considerations.

Over a third (35%) of Jewish Israelis said that the war against Iran would be sustainable in Israeli society for a month, while 28% said Israelis can bear it as long as needed to meet the operation’s goals. Among Arab Israelis, 33% said Israelis could endure the war for a month, while only 5% said the Israeli public can sustain it as long as needed.

At the same time, there was a rise in hope among Israelis: When respondents were asked for their outlooks in four areas, optimism about social cohesion was up eight percentage points from last month, reaching 30%; optimism about the economy rose to 34% from 31%; and optimism and the future of democracy reached 44%, up from 39%. Optimism about national security stayed about the same at 47%.

The vast majority of Arab Israelis reported that their mental health (85%) and financial situation (89%) had deteriorated, a slight increase from the last time IDI asked the poll question in November. Among Jewish Israelis, 43% reported a deterioration in their mental state and 36% in their financial situation, almost identical to the November 2025 findings.

The poll was conducted among a sample of 756 Israeli adults from March 22-26, with a 3.56% margin of error. 

More than 80% of Israelis support the war against Iran, polls by two major Israeli research institutions found this week, while several U.S. polls found that a majority of Americans oppose it.

The Israel Democracy Institute found that 82% of Israelis — 93% of Jewish Israelis and 26% of Israeli Arabs — support the war with Iran.

Among Jewish Israelis, the war has strong support across the political spectrum, with 76% of respondents on the left backing it, 93% of voters from the center and 97% from the right.

Similarly, the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University found that 81% of Israelis back the war against Iran, and 63% support continuing military efforts until the Iranian regime falls. 

Among Jewish Israelis, support for the war was at 92%, while only 38% of Israeli Arabs support it. About half (49%) of Israeli Arabs oppose the war, while the rest said they did not know. 

According to the IDI poll, three-fourths (74%) of Jewish Israelis said they supported continuing the war until the Iranian regime is overthrown, while only 18% of Israeli Arabs agreed; 61% of Israeli Arabs called for a ceasefire as soon as possible, while only 3% of Jewish Israelis chose that as their preferred option. 

Over a third of respondents (37%) to the INSS poll said that Israelis would be able to live under the current war situation for up to a month, while 29% said they could continue for over a month.

At the start of last year’s Iran war, half of the respondents said it could continue for over a month.

IDI found that most Jewish Israelis (74%) feel protected from Iranian attacks, whereas only 15% Israeli Arabs feel the same. Among Israelis who have a safe room in their homes, 76% feel safe, whereas among those who have to go to a shelter elsewhere, 63% feel safe.

Nearly two-thirds (64%) of Jewish Israelis feel that Israel’s security is a central consideration for President Donald Trump, while only 43% of Israeli Arabs do. 

Meanwhile, in the U.S., a CNN poll, conducted by SSRS shortly after the war began on Saturday, found that nearly 41% of Americans approve of the U.S. military action in Iran, with a sharp divide between Republicans, Democrats and independents — 77% of Republicans approve of the launch of the operation, compared to 32% of independents and 18% of Democrats. The poll found that 59% of Americans disapprove of the U.S. decision to strike.

Similarly, an NBC poll found that 41% of American registered voters approve of Trump’s approach to Iran, while 54% disapprove and 5% aren’t sure. Just 8% of Democrats approve of the president’s handling of the situation, while 79% of Republicans and 28% of independents approve of it. In addition, the poll found that 52% oppose the current U.S. military operation. A sizable majority of Republicans (77%) agree with the U.S. decision to strike Iran, while 89% of Democrats and 58% of independents disagree. 

There is a further divide between self-identified MAGA-aligned Republicans and other Republicans, the poll found: 90% of the former back the strikes, while 54% of the latter support them. The CNN poll found that MAGA Republicans are 30 points more likely than non-MAGA Republicans to strongly approve of the decision to take military action.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll found that just 27% of Americans approve of U.S. strikes — 55% of Republicans, 7% of Democrats and 19% of others. According to the poll, some 56% see President Donald Trump as too willing to use military force to advance U.S. interests — with 87% of Democrats holding this view, 23% of Republicans and 60% of people who don’t identify with either major party.

A Fox News poll found that Americans were evenly split between support and disapproval of the current U.S. action against Iran with Republicans overwhelmingly supportive and Democrats overwhelmingly against. Most American respondents (61%) saw Iran as a “real national security threat,” and only 38% did not.

Texas state Rep. James Talarico, a Democratic candidate for Senate in the state, has disavowed AIPAC and pledged not to take support from the group on the campaign trail.

But in late 2019, he attended an AIPAC event alongside a major donor to his campaign, according to a contemporaneous Instagram post about the event posted by an AIPAC supporter.

The post has been circulating online in recent days, driving discussion in progressive circles.

Since mounting his Senate bid, Talarico has vowed not to accept support from AIPAC or J Street, and has faced criticism from some in the Jewish community who believe he is singling out AIPAC in particular.

“I refuse to be complicit in the death and destruction in Gaza, and I will never use your tax dollars to support the killing in that part of the world, and it makes me sick to my stomach to see what’s happening,” Talarico said at an event last year. “I hope in this campaign here in Texas we can send a crystal-clear message to the rest of the country that we are done being complicit.”

Asked for comment on Talarico’s attendance at the AIPAC event, campaign spokesperson JT Ennis said, “James has been clear on his position on what is happening in Israel and Gaza. If anyone has questions on where James stands, they should look at his record, his extensive public comments, and the issues page on his website.”

Talarico has vowed to support efforts to ban some weapons sales to Israel and accused Israel of war crimes.

The same AIPAC supporter who shared the post with Talarico in 2019 was a major donor to his 2020 campaign; Talarico posted repeatedly on X about the donor offering to match up to $10,000 in donations to his campaign.

Talarico has also faced scrutiny on the campaign trail for accepting donations for his statehouse campaigns from a pro-gambling super PAC, Texas Sands PAC, funded by prominent pro-Israel GOP donor Miriam Adelson.

The Texas state representative is one a growing number of Democratic candidates who previously affiliated with or sought support from AIPAC but have since disavowed the group on the campaign trail amid increasing progressive hostility toward the pro-Israel organization, including Reps. Seth Moulton (D-MA), Valerie Foushee (D-NC), Deborah Ross (D-NC), Morgan McGarvey (D-KY), former New York Assemblyman Michael Blake and Evanston, Ill., Mayor Daniel Biss.

In a position paper shared with AIPAC in 2020 and obtained by Jewish Insider, Michael Blake, who is challenging Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY) in the Democratic primary in New York’s 15th Congressional District, vowed to offer strong support for Israel and to fight against anti-Israel sentiment, and emphasized the connections he feels as a Black person to the Israeli people and the Jewish community.

At the time, Blake — who had been an AIPAC affiliate for years — was seeking the group’s support for his 2020 run for the district. But now, in his second campaign against Torres, Blake is making criticism of Israel and strident opposition to AIPAC a central theme of his campaign.

Blake had expressed similar views in support of Israel in an interview with JI at the time of his 2020 campaign, but his pursuit of AIPAC’s support five years ago highlights the extent to which Blake has flipped on the issue in his latest campaign.

“The State of Israel is a beacon of hope in the Middle East. I understand the absolute priority in ensuring Israel remain that beacon, not just for the Middle East, but for the world,” Blake said in his 2020 position paper, obtained by JI and verified by an informed source. 

“When I become a member of Congress from the 15th Congressional District in New York, representing the most diverse county in America, I will continue the commitment I have shown as a community leader, lay minister, Assemblymember and national Democratic official in ensuring that the U.S.-Israel relationship remains strong and bipartisan for generations to come,” Blake continued.

He argued that he’s “uniquely positioned” to ensure that America and Israel remain close allies.

Blake had visited Israel twice, which he said “channeled my core values I developed here in the U.S., and allowed me to further internalize the remarkable bond between our two countries; that bond must continue to be strengthened.”

Blake now says that AIPAC’s treatment of the Black community was a key reason he broke with the group at some point prior to the start of the war in Gaza. But he struck a different note in his 2020 AIPAC paper, emphasizing the need for continued unity and solidarity between the Black and Jewish communities and the common experiences of the two communities.

“While circumstances may vary, I can understand the emotional, mental and physical duress that occurs when you don’t feel safe in your own land,” Blake said, referring to his visits to Israel. “The very idea of Israel demonstrates that the promise can be realized, and serves as an inspiration for all those who have kept the faith in the face of oppression and persecution. …  I feel strongly that Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people — a group who fled persecution across the world, to achieve a dream that they held onto for more than 2,000 years.”

He added in the position paper that he takes care to speak out in the district and across the country to emphasize that “anti-Israel rhetoric has no place anywhere.” He vowed to work to strengthen the ties between the Black and Jewish communities, and between Americans and Israelis.

“As a Black man in this country, after what we have endured for centuries and what I have personally endured via police brutality, I will not be silent while divisive language and actions are taken against the Israel people, the Jewish people, or anyone from anywhere,” Blake said at the time.

In the paper, Blake highlighted his work to support anti-Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions legislation in New York and vowed to support similar efforts to fight anti-Israel activity in Congress.

“As a member of Congress, a son of immigrants, and as an American citizen, I will oppose all efforts that seek to delegitimize Israel,” Blake said. “Because anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism are so closely linked, we must not tolerate the actions of the BDS movement, just as we do not tolerate racism and other forms of prejudice.”

And he promised to support continued military assistance with Israel, which he described as a mutually beneficial relationship, saying he “strongly support[s]” the 10-year memorandum of understanding for military aid between the United States and Israel.

The position paper also further undercuts Blake’s claims as a candidate, in public fora, that he walked away from AIPAC eight years ago, after coming to realize at AIPAC’s 2017 policy conference — where he was a speaker — that the group disdained President Barack Obama and other Black leaders.

Instead, Blake continued to attend AIPAC events through at least 2019, as previously reported by JI, and as the position paper demonstrates, unreservedly sought the group’s support in his 2020 campaign.

Blake’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

Breaking with many of his Senate Democratic colleagues, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) sounded a supportive note on the Israeli strike on Hamas leaders in Qatar on Tuesday.

“I strongly support Israel’s right to defend itself against Hamas,” Blumenthal told Jewish Insider. “I want to know more about the details of this particular strike — I’m learning about it in real time and anything done to destroy Hamas’ leadership or its terrorist capability or military capacity is a step in the right direction.”

Many prominent Senate Democrats have criticized the strike, saying it undermines negotiations for a ceasefire and that it should not have been carried out in Qatari territory. The White House expressed a similar view, breaking with top Senate Republicans who have been supportive of the Israeli attack.

Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) was the only other Senate Democrat who has publicly been supportive of the Israeli action.

More than 75 Jewish organizations around the world signed on to a joint letter Monday voicing “unequivocal support” for Katharina von Schnurbein, the European Commission coordinator on combating antisemitism, amid calls for her dismissal by EU parliament members over her support for Israel. 

In the letter addressed to Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the groups said von Schnurbein — who has served nearly a decade in the role —  “has worked tirelessly and with great integrity to strengthen European policies and initiatives that protect Jewish communities and ensure that Jewish life can flourish across our continent.”

“Her mandate has always been grounded in European values, democratic principles, and the urgent need to defend the Jewish community against hatred and discrimination,” the letter, spearheaded by the American Jewish Committee, continued. 

The signatories called it “deeply troubling” that von Schnurbein is accused of “‘bias’ simply because she refuses to trivialize or ignore threats against Jews.” Other signatories include the Anti-Defamation League, Conference of European Rabbis, Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and World Jewish Congress. 

“To attack her for defending Jewish dignity and security is, in effect, to challenge the European Union’s own credibility in combating antisemitism,” the letter continued.   

A formal request to the European Commission calling for von Schnurbein’s firing was submitted on Friday by 26 EU Parliament members, Israel Hayom reported. The correspondence condemned a leaked presentation she made in May regarding ties between antisemitism and efforts to delegitimize Israel. It claims that von Schnurbein went beyond her institutional authority by attempting to persuade EU member-state representatives against imposing sanctions that would impact Israel’s position in the EU-Israel Association Agreement.

A new Gallup poll underscores the degree to which Israel’s security is now dependent on support from President Donald Trump and the Republican Party, the Jewish state having drained much of its political capital from both Democrats and independents amid the ongoing war against Hamas in Gaza and the resulting humanitarian crisis.

The numbers are clear: Support for Israel is now becoming a partisan issue after the Jewish state enjoyed decades of bipartisan support in the United States. Anti-Israel activists on the left, looking to exploit the moment, are working to win over Democratic lawmakers to their side — and are finding some unlikely allies moving in their direction amid the sustained pressure.

The data is sobering: Only about one-third of Americans now support Israel’s military action in Gaza, with 60% disapproving. At the beginning of the war, exactly half of Americans supported Israel’s war against Hamas. The drop-off has come entirely from Democrats (36% supported in November 2023, while 8% do now) and independents (47% supported in November 2023 while 25% support now). 

Among Republicans, however, support for Israel’s military efforts has remained significant. The exact same share of Republicans who backed Israel’s war against Hamas in November 2023 (71%) continue to support Israel’s efforts today. Trump’s decision to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities has, if anything, bolstered GOP support for Israel and undermined the isolationist and small anti-Israel faction within the party.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s close relationship with Trump, a partnership that has led to major policy successes, like the successful, coordinated attacks against Iran’s nuclear program, has nonetheless also played a role in the growing partisanship. Netanyahu, for the first time, is viewed unfavorably by a majority of Americans — with Democrats now registering more overt disapproval of the Israeli leader since Trump reentered office.

The Gallup polling shows there was already soft support for Israel among Democrats before the war began, with majorities of Democrats opposed to the Jewish state’s efforts at self-defense just weeks after the Oct. 7 attacks. That said, a clear majority of Democratic lawmakers maintained their support for Israel’s war against Hamas, with only a relatively small faction calling for ceasefires before Hamas’ leadership and terror infrastructure could be degraded.

But there are signs that some of the more mainstream voices are succumbing to the anti-Israel shifts within the party’s base. Over half of Senate Democrats supported a Bernie Sanders-led resolution last night that would block U.S. arms sales to Israel — up from the 15 Democrats who voted for a similar measure back in April.  Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), a pragmatic Democratic senator, who was absent for the vote, sounded open to cutting off “offensive” military aid to Israel. Sen. Angus King (I-ME), a pro-Israel independent who caucuses with Democrats, changed his tune and called for ending all military aid to Israel this week.

What’s alarming is how some of this consuming anti-Israel sentiment among Democrats is showing some signs of evolving into, at least, a tolerance of antisemitism. Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro received blowback from the left for simply calling out New York City Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani over failing to condemn “globalize the intifada” rhetoric. Slotkin felt the need, while on an anti-Israel podcast, to pander that she’s a Jewish senator who wasn’t backed by Jewish groups. Progressive spaces are becoming increasingly inhospitable to Jews, at least those who don’t renounce their support for a Jewish state.

The many liberal-minded, pro-Israel Jewish Democrats have felt increasingly homeless politically as a result of the shifts within the party — and the accommodation of views that, until very recently, have been beyond the political pale. If the party’s reaction to its 2024 defeat is to tack even further leftward and alienate core parts of their coalition, it could well be lurching towards its own McGovern moment in the future.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said that future military actions by Israel must be “conducted in a way to maintain support here at home” amid GOP backlash to the Jewish state’s most recent operations in Syria and the strike that killed three at a Catholic church in Gaza.

Speaking to Jewish Insider from the Capitol on Tuesday, Graham warned that Christians in the West Bank must not face the same fate as other Middle Eastern Christian communities, including in Syria, where as many as 1,000 Christians were killed between the fall of former Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad in November and March of this year under the new Syrian government. 

“Support for Christians throughout the region is eroded, and we need to make sure that doesn’t happen in the West Bank,” Graham told JI when asked how Israel had handled the backlash against its recent military actions in Gaza, last week’s fatal strike on the Holy Family Catholic Church, the only Catholic church in Gaza, and reports of an arson attack in the area of the fifth-century Church of St. George in the West Bank town of Taybeh — which an Israeli police probe found to be unfounded, stating that the fire had been “in an adjacent open area, with no buildings, no crops, and no infrastructure of the site damaged.”

“I think it’s very important for us to stand up for Americans wherever they’re at, minority faiths, particularly the Christian faith. As to Israel, it is the most tolerant place in the region for minorities. They’re in a war for their lives, but we’ve got to make sure that the war is conducted in a way to maintain support here at home,” he continued.

His comments reflect recent unease within the Trump administration over Israel’s latest military actions. U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee visited the Church of St. George on Saturday, where he decried the attack as an “act of terror” and demanded “harsh consequences” for the perpetrators, while White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Monday that President Donald Trump was “caught off guard” by the moves. 

The strike on the church in Gaza killed three and injured 10, including a priest. Following a conversation between Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the latter publicly apologized and vowed to investigate what his office described in a statement as “stray ammunition” hitting the house of worship. 

The South Carolina senator added that the Taybeh fire and the killing of 20-year-old Palestinian American Saifullah Musallet in the West Bank earlier this month, which the IDF is investigating as possibly being perpetrated by Israeli settlers, should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. 

“The attempted arson, whatever you want to call it, I don’t know who did it but I’m glad the church was saved. The Israeli police said that no damage was done. Just keep looking. The 20-year-old Palestinian American, keep investigating,” Graham said, going on to praise Netanyahu’s decision to call Pope Leo XIV after the church attack in Gaza.

Graham emphasized his continued support for Israel, which he argued should be differentiated as a state and a people from individual or small groups of Israelis committing acts of violence in the West Bank.

“There may be some rogue settlers, but they are not Israel. I think Israel, through its very founding, has demonstrated religious tolerance better than any country in the region, and, quite frankly, Israel is about as good as any place in the world. Do you have some aggressive settlers? Maybe so, I don’t know, but I’m not going to judge an entire country by some people,” Graham said.

“The issue is not whether Israel has abandoned Christians. It’s whether or not the damage that’s been done to the Christian community, will those responsible be held accountable?” he asked. 

Graham said he hoped to be helpful to both sides as daylight between the White House and Netanyahu over Israel’s actions in Syria entered public view, explaining that he was amenable to the points of view of the Trump administration and the Israelis. 

“As to Israel, their security concerns in Syria are legitimate. They’re very important to me, but I also want to help the president with his efforts to integrate the country. So there’s some tension, and I hope we can clear it up,” he said.

He explained that finding out which parties were responsible for the recent attacks on Druze minorities in the war-torn country was a critical next step, and would help establish whether the U.S. needs to reimpose sanctions on Syria.

“It has been the policy of the Trump administration to lift sanctions and give [Syrian leader Abu Mohammed al] Jolani a chance. This fight between the Druze and the Bedouins, what role did the Syrian army play? I don’t know. Israel has been making the argument that the Syrian regular army forces were part of the massacre, that’s very important to me. If that proves to be the case, we’ll reimpose sanctions. If it proves not to be the case, then I want to know that also,” Graham said. 

“What role did the Syrian army regime forces play in all this and how much control do they have of this coalition that they formed? That, to me, is the most important question. Is Syria under the command and control of the government? If it’s not, what factions are outside their control? And let’s try to fix it,” he continued.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday blamed coordinated anti-Israel advocacy campaigns for recent polls showing falling support for the Jewish state in the United States, particularly among Democrats, but argued that effective Israeli counter-messaging could reverse those trends.

Recent surveys have shown that support for Israel has declined among Democrats since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel, with a majority now viewing Israel unfavorably.

“I am certainly interested in maintaining the great support that Israel has had. I think there’s been a concerted effort to spread vilifications and demonization against Israel on social media,” Netanyahu said in response to a question from Jewish Insider at a news conference on Capitol Hill following a closed-door meeting with House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA).

“It’s funded, it’s malignant, and we intend to fight it, because nothing defeats lies like the truth, and we shall spread the truth for everyone to see it,” Netanyahu continued. “Once people are exposed to the facts, we win, hands down.”

The Israeli premier hinted that he may have a second meeting with President Donald Trump before leaving the U.S. later this week, following their Monday evening meeting, as some media reports have indicated.

At a news conference on Capitol Hill, Jewish Insider's @marcrod97 asked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about polls showing falling support for Israel in the U.S.

"I think there’s been a concerted effort to spread vilifications and demonization against Israel on social… pic.twitter.com/z5JwidJeo5

— Jewish Insider (@J_Insider) July 8, 2025

Netanyahu said he and Trump had discussed the need to “finish the job in Gaza, release all our hostages, eliminate and destroy Hamas’ military and governance capabilities” in their private conversation on Monday — an issue left unaddressed in their public remarks.

Netanyahu told reporters that he has continued to work on ceasefire efforts as recently as this morning. Asked about a Hamas counterproposal, Netanyahu emphasized that Israel had accepted the proposal put forward by U.S. Mideast envoy Steve Witkoff and the Qatari mediators.

He demurred in response to a question about Qatar’s role in the negotiations, saying that he would “talk about the process later. I have a lot to say about it, but right now I’m totally focused on the result, as is President Trump.”

Netanyahu also aligned himself with Trump’s foreign policy motto — cribbed from President Ronald Reagan — of “peace through strength.”

“First comes strength, then comes peace,” Netanyahu said. “Our resolute action, the resolute decision of President Trump to act with us against those who seek to destroy Israel and threaten the peace of the world has made a remarkable change in the Middle East. … There are opportunities for peace that we intend to realize.”

Asked about a proposal on Capitol Hill to provide Israel with American B-2 bombers and bunker-buster bombs in the event that further strikes on Iran are needed, Netanyahu said that he would “of course … like it” if Israel had the same capabilities as the U.S., but added, “We are appreciative of the systems we receive that I think could serve not only the interests of Israel’s security, but American security and the security of the free world.”

“I won’t get into specifics. There’s much, much more to discuss, and many variegated areas that are best left a more confidential forum,” he continued.

Israel’s strikes on Iranian military and nuclear targets are prompting fractured responses from Senate Democrats, with a few offering full support for Israel and others forcefully condemning the strikes, while some have sought to carve out a path somewhere in the middle.

Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-NV), one of the most vocal pro-Israel Democrats in the Senate, offered her first comments on the strike Friday morning, saying that Iran cannot be allowed to have a nuclear weapon, and is “closer than ever” to developing one, as reflected in the International Atomic Energy Agency’s recent report that Iran had violated its nonproliferation commitments.

“The Iranian regime and its proxies have been very public about their commitment to the destruction of Israel and Jewish communities around the world. We should take them at their word,” Rosen said. “Israel acted in self-defense against an attack from Iran, and the U.S. must continue to stand with Israel, as it has for decades, at this dangerous moment.”

She also emphasized the need to protect U.S. troops in the region.

Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA), long a proponent of strikes on Iran, was the first Senate Democrat to offer support for the operation.

On the other side of the spectrum, progressives have been loudly denouncing the strikes. 

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said that the strikes are “an escalation that is deeply concerning and will inevitably invite counterattacks.”

She added that they endanger nuclear talks and U.S. servicemembers.

“I agree with President Trump’s instinct to distance the U.S. from Israel’s actions, but Iran and its proxies are unlikely to differentiate the U.S. from Israel. This is not the time to tie our hands by reducing our diplomatic presence and resourcing as the State Department and OMB [Office of Management and Budget] plan to do,” Shaheen said. “This is a dangerous moment for the region and world. The Trump Administration must quickly move to de-escalate the situation.”

Other progressive Senate Democrats have tried to accuse Israel of undermining President Trump’s wishes, even though Trump himself has publicly expressed support for the attacks in statements and media interviews into Friday morning.

“This strike by Iran is clearly a stick in the eye for the American president because in addition to striking nuclear facilities and at least one of their top research scientists, reportedly Israel also killed the chief negotiator who was negotiating with the United States of America and so it’s pretty transparent that this was an effort to submarine, to undermine our diplomacy,” Sen. Chis Murphy (D-CT) said on Friday morning on “Morning Joe.” “Now, it looks as if diplomacy has no chance.”

A handful of other Democrats have sought some path between those two poles, acknowledging Israel’s right to defend itself while pushing for deescalation and averting a concerted regional war.

Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), the vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, emphasized the need to “avoid steps that will cause further escalation across the region,” while also stating, “Iran has threatened the safety of Israel and the region and Israel has an undeniable right to defend itself and its citizens.”

He said that his “foremost concern” is protecting U.S. personnel in the Middle East.

Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) said that the details, justification and consequences of the operation are unknown, while emphasizing that the U.S. had made clear that Israel acted alone and the administration continues to pursue peace.

“I have long believed that the world cannot tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran and that Iran and its proxies pose a serious threat to American interests. I am deeply concerned by the IAEA Board of Governors’ determination earlier today that Iran has failed to comply with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and Iran’s defiant subsequent declaration of a new underground enrichment facility,” Coons said. “Even so, tonight’s actions have the potential to lead to dangerous escalation and a full-scale regional war. I am following developments closely tonight and am urging restraint.”

“Everyone’s goal must now be the prevention of a full-blown regional war,” Coons continued. “The Trump administration and our regional partners must work together to reduce the risks of escalation and work towards a path forward that provides safety and stability for the entire region.”

As of Friday morning, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), the top Senate Democrat, was the only one of the top four congressional leaders who had yet to speak out about the attacks.

Schumer attended the Friday morning funeral of former Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) where he delivered a eulogy, and was expected to receive a briefing on the strikes afterward, according to a source familiar with his plans. Schumer was expected to issue a statement after the briefing.