Approval for President Donald Trump’s handling of the military conflict with Iran has fallen to 28%, according to a new AP-NORC poll conducted between July 23 and July 27. The survey indicates that two-thirds of Americans believe the war has not been worth fighting, marking a significant decline in public sentiment as the conflict extends beyond initial predictions. This erosion of support presents a tangible political risk ahead of November’s midterm elections, linking the administration’s foreign policy to domestic economic pressures and casualty concerns.

The data reveals a sharp contraction in partisan backing, particularly among Republicans. While broad opposition persists among Democrats and independents, approximately 37% of Republicans now disapprove of the war. This represents a notable shift from June, when Republican approval stood at 71%. Overall, Trump’s approval rating for the Iran situation slipped from 34% in June to the current 28% figure.

Public Preference for De-escalation

Voter preferences regarding military action show a clear mandate for restraint. Only about 2 in 10 adults favor the continuation of military action. In contrast, roughly 3 in 10 respondents support pausing attacks to negotiate another ceasefire, while about 2 in 10 want the United States to stop military action entirely. Nearly 7 in 10 voters prioritized achieving a permanent ceasefire.

Economic Pressures and Transparency Concerns

Pocketbook issues are rivaling national security goals in voter priorities. About 72% of respondents stated that preventing higher oil and gasoline prices was extremely or very important, compared to roughly two-thirds who cited stopping Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon as equally critical. These economic anxieties are grounded in market realities; gasoline prices crossed $4 a gallon in July as fighting disrupted oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz. Although Reuters reported that oil has since eased below $90, both major benchmarks remain on track for monthly gains of about 20%.

Ohio Republican Robert McClary expressed deep distrust in the administration’s rationale, stating, "I don’t have any trust in this administration at all and to why they brought us into this war." He added that Washington had "gotten yourself buried into this mess." Similarly, Florida Republican Ryan Sloan cited a lack of clarity as his reason for turning against the war, noting, "I just wish I’d have had more transparency about why things were going on the way they were."

What the Numbers Show

The divergence between national security objectives and economic priorities highlights a shifting voter calculus. With 72% of Americans prioritizing fuel price stability over nuclear non-proliferation (supported by roughly two-thirds), the conflict’s economic externalities are becoming a dominant political liability. The drop in Republican approval from 71% to 61% suggests that traditional base loyalty is weakening under the pressure of rising costs and perceived administrative opacity.

U.S. officials have provided an updated stance on the Hamas disarmament initiative, stating that the deal is condition-based and that close coordination with Israel is ongoing. The clarification comes alongside acknowledgment that Israel remains skeptical about Hamas's willingness to disarm, adding a layer of complexity to the previously announced plan.

U.S.-Israel Coordination and Conditional Framework

According to U.S. officials, the disarmament plan is not unconditional but is instead tied to specific conditions that must be met for the deal to proceed. Officials emphasized that coordination with Israel is close, even as Israel has expressed skepticism that Hamas will follow through on disarmament commitments. The conditional nature of the deal marks a significant clarification to the earlier announcement that the plan would be set in motion within weeks.

Key Highlights

• U.S. officials confirm the Hamas disarmament deal is condition-based, not unconditional.
• Close coordination between U.S. and Israeli officials is ongoing regarding the plan.
• Israel has expressed skepticism that Hamas will agree to or follow through on disarmament.
• No specific conditions or mechanisms of the deal were disclosed in the available information.

The updated U.S. position introduces a more nuanced framework around the disarmament initiative, with the condition-based structure and Israel's skepticism shaping the trajectory of the plan. Further developments are expected as negotiations and coordination continue.