Nournews: In the world of international relations, there is always a gap between “government decisions” and “societal preferences”—a gap that is sometimes small, but at other times so large that it can alter the course of war or peace. In the case of Iran–U.S. relations, especially now that it has taken on a more conflict-driven nature, this gap is becoming unusually visible. New data from a reputable Ipsos poll on American public opinion regarding a U.S. war against Iran shows a clear sign of a profound shift in the American mindset regarding war, intervention, and the country’s global role.

According to this poll, 62 percent of Americans oppose Donald Trump’s overall performance as president, while only 37 percent approve of it. When respondents were asked specifically about Trump’s handling of Iran, 66 percent disapproved. These figures are not merely an expression of a partisan or political divide; rather, they indicate a gradual erosion of public trust in decision-making models in Trump’s foreign policy. In this context, Iran is not simply a “foreign policy issue,” but a test case for measuring the level of acceptance of militarism within American society.

At a deeper level, 56 percent of Americans oppose using the military to bring about change in other countries. This finding is historically significant. In past decades, the United States viewed military intervention not only as a tool but as part of its geopolitical identity. From the Cold War to the post-9/11 Middle East, there was a belief that military power could reproduce a global order aligned with U.S. preferences. But now, more than half of American society is questioning the militaristic logic of Trump’s administration.

The focal point of this shift becomes clearer in Americans’ views on the use of force against Iran. 61 percent of respondents say a military attack on Iran would be a mistake, while only 36 percent support it. This divide is more than a simple disagreement; it reflects a kind of “civilizational fatigue with war.” Prolonged wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have imposed heavy human and economic costs, and the collective memory of American society has become more sensitive than before to military intervention.

However, the data is not uniform. 41 percent of respondents say it is still too early to judge the outcomes of U.S. actions in Iran. This figure indicates a state of “cognitive suspension” in public opinion—a society that neither fully believes in war nor decisively rejects it. From a political perspective, this is highly significant, as in such conditions, policymakers can potentially shift public opinion through media narratives.

In terms of preferred options, the divide is even more pronounced. 48 percent of Americans favor a peace agreement with Iran, even if it comes at an economic or political cost to the United States. In contrast, 46 percent still emphasize increased pressure or even a return to military options. This essentially reflects a deeply divided society that has not yet reached a consensus on how to define a “solution” regarding Iran.

Another notable finding is that 52 percent of respondents believe Israel has excessive influence over U.S. decision-making on Iran. This perception is not merely about foreign policy; it reflects a broader reconsideration of the concept of independent decision-making within the American power structure. A segment of American society is now questioning whether U.S. foreign policy is fully based on national interests or influenced by external actors.

Overall, the Ipsos poll presents a multidimensional picture of American society: a society fatigued by war, skeptical of the effectiveness of military intervention, yet still divided and uncertain about alternatives. This situation creates a serious challenge for U.S. foreign policy, as the gap between decision-makers and public opinion continues to widen. Strategically, this divide could have a direct impact on Iran’s position: the more skeptical American public opinion becomes toward war, the higher the political cost of military action for governments. As a result, the space for diplomacy—however fragile—becomes somewhat broader.

Perhaps the most important message of this poll is not about Iran, but about the United States itself: a power that still possesses vast military capabilities but faces serious social constraints on their use. This is the point at which foreign policy is no longer shaped solely in decision-making rooms, but increasingly in the mind of a society that has become more cautious, hesitant, and critical toward war than before.