
Just 23% of Americans say Israeli military actions in Gaza are fully justified, CNN poll finds
Only 23% of Americans say Israel's actions have been fully justified, a 27-point drop from a October 2023 poll taken shortly after Hamas' October 7 attacks. Another 27% now say those actions have been partially justified and 22% say that they have not been justified at all. In October 2023, just 8% said Israel's actions were not justified at all.
This drop cuts across party lines but is far larger among Democrats and independents. Since 2023, the share of Democrats who say that Israel's actions have been fully justified has dropped from 38% to just 7%, the share among independents from 45% to 14%, and the share among Republicans from 68% to 52%.
Since this March, the share of Democrats and Democratic-leaning adults saying that the US provides too much military aid for Israel has risen from 44% to 59% while the share of Republican-aligned adults saying that has stayed steady at 24%. Democratic-aligned adults under the age of 35 are particularly opposed to US military aid to Israel, with 72% saying the US is doing too much, including 43% who say that the US should stop aid to Israel entirely and another 29% saying that it should reduce the amount of military aid.
Younger adults across parties express the most skepticism towards Israel. Just 1 in 10 adults under 35 say that Israel's military actions in Gaza have been fully justified while a third say that Israel's actions have not been justified at all. Younger adults are also most likely to say that Israel has used too much military force (61%) and that the US is doing too much to help Israel in its war with Hamas (56%).
People of color are similarly skeptical: 13% say that Israel's actions in Gaza have been fully justified, compared to 29% saying they have not been justified at all. Nearly 6 in 10 people of color. (57%) say Israel has used too much military force.
Americans are split on Israel's use of military force and American aid to Israel. Half of Americans say that Israel has used too much military force in Gaza (39% say the amount of force has been about right and 10% say it's been too little). A rising share says the US is doing too much to help Israel in its war with Hamas (42%, up from 34% in March of this year and 33% in January 2024), with 42% saying the US is doing the right amount to help and 14% too little. Americans who think the US is doing too much split evenly between reducing military aid (22% of all adults) and stopping it entirely (21%).
The rising share of Americans who express concerns about the extent of US aid to Israel comes amid broader questions about the nation's involvement in international affairs.
A majority (56%) say the US should not take a leading role in trying to solve international problems (43% said the US should take such a role), a change from March, when the public split roughly evenly.
Democratic-aligned adults in particular have shifted away from support for an active US role in the world. A majority of Democrats and Democratic-leaners (58%) said the US should take a leading role in solving international problems in March, weeks after the confrontation in the Oval Office between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Trump, and Vice President JD Vance led to a pause in US military aid to Ukraine. That portion is down to 44% now, a reversion to more familiar ground (42% of Democratic-aligned adults favored a leading role in 2004 and 37% said the same in 2015). This poll was fielded weeks after the US military struck three nuclear sites in Iran, an action that was deeply unpopular among Democrats.
The split among Democratic-aligned adults in the country's role in international affairs further divides the party's views on Israel. Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning adults who say the US should not take a leading role generally, just 25% think Israel's military actions against Hamas have been fully or partially justified (compared to 61% among those who say the US should take a leading role), and they're about twice as likely to favor halting US military aid to Israel (37%, compared to 19% of those who say the US should take a leading role).
Before Trump was first elected, Republican-aligned adults were more supportive of the US taking a leading role (65% in 2004 and 54% in 2015), and the Republican Party has historically been more inclined toward US interventionism. After Trump made the end of US interventionism a key pillar of his presidential campaigns, the party has become split between more traditional hawks and isolationists, and Republican-aligned adults now split evenly on whether the country should take a leading role.
Reflecting the more traditional view, one Republican from North Carolina included in the poll writes that helping Ukraine defeat Russia is the most important issue facing the country. But other Republicans felt that US interventionism led to worse outcomes for American citizens, including one person from Pennsylvania who says that 'we help and worry about people in other countries before our own. I think we need to make our country and people great again before we can help others.'
Still, foreign affairs are top of mind for few Americans, with just 5% naming an issue related to foreign policy as the most important issue facing the country.
Americans remain broadly skeptical of Trump's handling of foreign affairs (40% approve to 60% disapprove, almost identical to April). In the aftermath of the US military strikes in Iran, the public also expresses doubt about Trump's handling of his role as commander-in-chief, with an approval rating of 40% and a disapproval rating of 59%, higher than at any point in his first term – including January 2020, when his disapproval rating stood at 53% shortly after he ordered the assassination of an Iranian military leader, Qasem Soleimani.
A majority of the public (53%) also say that Trump's foreign policy decisions have hurt America's standing in the world, compared to just 31% who say his decisions have helped America's standing (15% say they have not made any difference). One independent in Michigan responding to the poll writes that the most important issue facing the country is how 'the world is now viewing the United States. We were a beacon of hope at one time. Not anymore.'
While Republicans generally approve of Trump's handling of foreign affairs (86% approve) and his role as commander-in-chief (84%), a smaller portion (69%) say his foreign policy decisions have helped America's standing in the world (15% say they have hurt and 17% that they haven't made any difference). Democrats have a more uniformly negative view of Trump's handling of foreign affairs: 93% say they disapprove of his handling of foreign affairs, 91% how he handles his role as commander-in-chief, and 89% say his decisions have hurt America's standing in the world (with just 4% saying they've helped).
Several key figures in the Trump administration's handling of foreign affairs are viewed unfavorably by the American people, including Vance (45% unfavorable to 33% favorable), Secretary of State Marco Rubio (36% unfavorable to 24% favorable), and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth (34% unfavorable to 17% favorable). Among Republicans, all three are broadly popular, though with sizable shares still unsure about their feelings on Rubio or Hegseth.
The CNN poll was conducted by SSRS from July 10-13 among a random national sample of 1,057 US adults drawn from a probability-based panel. Surveys were either conducted online or by telephone with a live interviewer. Results among all adults have a margin of sampling error of ±3.5 percentage points.
CNN's Jennifer Agiesta and Ariel Edwards-Levy contributed to this report.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Boston Globe
28 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
No proof Hamas routinely stole UN aid, Israeli military officials say
Now, with hunger at crisis levels in the territory, Israel is coming under increased international pressure over its conduct of the war in Gaza and the humanitarian suffering it has brought. Doctors in the territory say that an increasing number of their patients are suffering from -- and dying of -- starvation. More than 100 aid agencies and rights groups warned this past week of 'mass starvation' and implored Israel to lift restrictions on humanitarian assistance. The European Union and at least 28 governments, including Israeli allies like Britain, France, and Canada, issued a joint statement condemning Israel's 'drip-feeding of aid' to Gaza's 2 million Palestinian residents. Advertisement Israel has largely brushed off the criticism. David Mencer, a government spokesperson, said this past week that there was 'no famine caused by Israel.' Instead, he blamed Hamas and poor coordination by the United Nations for any food shortages. Advertisement Israel moved in May toward replacing the UN-led aid system that had been in place for most of the 21-month war in Gaza, opting instead to back a private, American-run operation guarded by armed US contractors in areas controlled by Israeli military forces. Some aid still comes into Gaza through the United Nations and other organizations. The new system has proved to be much deadlier for Palestinians trying to obtain food handouts. According to the Gaza Health Ministry, almost 1,100 people have been killed by gunfire on their way to get food handouts under the new system, in many cases by Israeli soldiers who opened fire on hungry crowds. Israeli officials have said they fired shots in the air in some instances because the crowds came too close or endangered their forces. The military officials who spoke to The New York Times said that the original UN aid operation was relatively reliable and less vulnerable to Hamas interference than the operations of many of the other groups bringing aid into Gaza. That's largely because the United Nations managed its own supply chain and handled distribution directly inside Gaza. Hamas did steal from some of the smaller organizations that donated aid, as those groups were not always on the ground to oversee distribution, according to the senior Israeli officials and others involved in the matter. But, they say, there was no evidence that Hamas regularly stole from the United Nations, which provided the largest chunk of the aid. A Hamas representative did not immediately respond to requests for comment. An internal US government analysis came to a similar conclusion, Reuters reported Friday. It found no evidence of systematic Hamas theft of US-funded humanitarian supplies, the report said. Advertisement 'For months, we and other organizations were dragged through the mud by accusations that Hamas steals from us,' said Georgios Petropoulos, a former UN official in Gaza who oversaw aid coordination with Israel for nearly 13 months of war. The senior military officials and others interviewed by the Times spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly on behalf of the military or government. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office did not immediately respond to requests for comment. In a statement, the military said that it has been 'well documented' that Hamas has routinely 'exploited humanitarian aid to fund terrorist activities.' But the military did not dispute the assessment that there was no evidence that Hamas regularly stole aid from the United Nations. The Israeli government and military have often clashed over how to conduct the war in Gaza. Early last year, top commanders urged a cease-fire with Hamas to secure the release of hostages. Netanyahu's government instead expanded the ground operation in southern Gaza. Israel used the rationale that Hamas steals aid when it cut off all food and other supplies to Gaza between March and May. In March, after a cease-fire between Hamas and Israel collapsed, Netanyahu said: 'Hamas is currently taking control of all supplies and goods entering Gaza,' and he declared that Israel would prevent anything from entering the territory. That blockade, and problems with a new aid system that launched in May, brought hunger and starvation in Gaza to the current crisis levels. For most of the war, the UN was the largest single source of aid entering Gaza, according to data from the Israeli military unit that oversees policy in the territory. Advertisement Now, the new aid system is managed instead by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a private American company led by a former CIA agent. It was intended to eventually replace international aid organizations and the UN role. But it has only a few distribution hubs, compared with hundreds under the former UN-run operation. The new system's rollout at the end of May was quickly followed by near-daily episodes of deadly violence near distribution sites. Desperate and hungry Palestinians must go to the few aid distribution sites located in areas controlled by Israeli forces. The hours of operation are limited and supplies run out, so crowds arrive early, with some walking for miles to get there. Since May 19, when Israel allowed emergency supplies to resume entering Gaza after its two-month blockade, half of the aid has been distributed by the United Nations and international organizations, with the other half coming through the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, the Israeli military says. Petropoulos welcomed the notion that some Israeli officials had recognized the UN-led aid system as effective during the war. But he said he wished that endorsement had come much sooner. 'If the UN had been taken at face value months ago, we wouldn't have wasted all this time and Gazans wouldn't be starving and being shot at trying to feed their families,' he said. This article originally appeared in


Chicago Tribune
28 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
How France's recognition of the state of Palestine could shift Middle East dynamics
PARIS — France's bold decision to recognize the state of Palestine could help to shift conversations about the future of the Middle East, even if it's unlikely to have an immediate impact for people in Gaza or on Israel's war with Hamas. In a world where nations are again using military force to impose their will on others — notably Russia in Ukraine, and the U.S. and Israel with their recent strikes on Iran and its nuclear facilities — French President Emmanuel Macron is attempting to strike a blow for diplomacy and the idea that war rarely brings peace. With less than two years left of his second and last term as president, Macron also has his legacy to think about. Not acting decisively as a humanitarian disaster unfolds in Gaza could be a stain when history books are written. Macron has levers to influence world affairs as leader of a nuclear-armed, economically and diplomatically powerful country that also sits at the big table at the United Nations, as one of the five permanent members of its security council. Being the first member of the G7 group of industrialized nations to take this leap carries domestic risks. Presiding over a country with both Europe's largest Jewish population and largest Muslim population, Macron is on a public opinion tightrope. His words will please some voters but infuriate others — a fact reflected by deeply divided political reactions in France to his decision announced on X on Thursday evening. But after staunchly backing Israel's right to defend itself against Hamas and its Oct. 7, 2023, attack that triggered the war, Macron is signaling that France's support can only go so far. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu denounced the shift by one of his country's closer allies in Europe. 'Such a move rewards terror and risks creating another Iranian proxy, just as Gaza became,' he said in a statement. 'A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a launch pad to annihilate Israel — not to live in peace beside it.'' The idea that Palestinians and Israelis could live side by side in peace in their own states has perhaps never looked more unrealistic — with Gaza in ruins and the occupied West Bank facing increasing settlement by Israelis. Macron's words alone won't change that. Still, the French leader's message is that the hope of a 'two-state solution' achieved through diplomacy must not be allowed to die — however unattainable it may seem. 'This solution is the only path that can address the legitimate aspirations of both the Israelis and the Palestinians. It must now be brought about as quickly as possible,' Macron said in a letter to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas which confirmed his decision to recognize Palestine as a state. 'The prospect of a negotiated solution to the conflict in the Middle East seems increasingly distant. I cannot resign myself to that,' he said. The first impacts are likeliest not in Gaza but in world capitals where leaders may face pressure or feel emboldened to follow France's lead. Attention is focusing on other G7 nations, because of their economic and diplomatic sway. 'Macron's declaration could create a precedent because it would be the first Western country in the G7 to do so, which could have the effect of leading others,' said David Rigoulet-Roze, a researcher at the French Institute of Strategic Analysis. Although more than 140 countries recognize Palestine as a state, France will be the biggest, most populous and most powerful among those in Europe that have taken this step. 'It creates some small momentum,' said Yossi Mekelberg, a senior consulting fellow at the Chatham House think tank in London who also added, however, that 'this is not enough.' 'France should be congratulated, and Macron should be congratulated for doing that and showing the courage,' he said. Until now, China and Russia were the only permanent members of the U.N. Security Council that recognized Palestinian statehood. France will join them when Macron makes good on his promise in September at the U.N. General Assembly. The new trio will leave the U.S. and the U.K. in a security council minority as its only permanent members that don't recognize Palestine as a state. The so-called P5 nations are divided on many other issues — including Ukraine, trade and climate change — so France's shift isn't, in itself, likely to spur radical and rapid change for Palestinians. Still, if only mathematically, the U.S. — Israel's most important ally — and the U.K could find themselves more isolated among the big powers in any discussions on solutions for the Middle East. U.S. President Donald Trump dismissed Macron's decision on Friday, saying 'What he says doesn't matter. It's not going to change anything.' France may have better traction with the U.K. Putting Brexit behind them, the U.K. and France are now drawing closer, most notably in support for Ukraine. If British Prime Minister Keir Starmer follows Macron's example, Trump could become the odd man out on Palestinian statehood among the security council's big five powers. Starmer has signaled growing disquiet over the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, saying in a statement Thursday that suffering and starvation there 'is unspeakable and indefensible.' But he doesn't seem ready to take a leap like Macron, suggesting that fighting must stop first. 'Statehood is the inalienable right of the Palestinian people,' Starmer said. 'A ceasefire will put us on a path to the recognition of a Palestinian state and a two-state solution.'

29 minutes ago
USAID analysis finds no evidence of widespread aid diversion by Hamas in Gaza
An analysis compiled by USAID officials examining more than 150 reported incidents involving the theft or loss of U.S.-funded humanitarian aid in the war-torn Gaza Strip says it failed to find any evidence that Hamas -- the militant rulers of the Palestinian enclave -- engaged in widespread diversion of assistance, according to a presentation reviewed by ABC News. The findings of the report appear to undercut the Trump administration's repeated claims that Hamas has regularly interfered with aid distribution in the past -- assertions it has used to justify its support for the controversial Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) and for measures undertaken by Israel to limit the flow of assistance to neighboring Gaza through other pathways. The GHF -- with Israel's approval and despite rejection from the United Nations -- took over most of the aid distribution system in Gaza on May 27, after an 11-week Israeli blockade on all supplies from entering the strip. Israel has long accused Hamas of stealing aid provided by the U.N. -- formerly the main distributor -- and others to fund its militant activity -- claims which Hamas denies. Israel has allowed a limited amount of supplies into Gaza since lifting the blockade and, according to an Israeli security official, is "coordinating future airdrops of aid" by foreign countries "that are expected to take place in the coming days." This comes after a coalition of more than 100 organizations warned this week that "mass starvation" is spreading in Gaza with "supplies now totally depleted." USAID officials behind the presentation say they analyzed alleged incidents of fraud, abuse and waste reported between October 2023, when the ongoing Israel-Hamas war began, and last May. It was compiled before the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) -- once the world's largest single donor of humanitarian aid -- officially ceased independent operations on July 1. The Trump administration canceled more than 80% of the agency's programs, while the remainder were absorbed by the U.S. Department of State. USAID officials say their findings indicate that in the majority of cases involving the loss of aid, the perpetrator could not be definitively identified. The Israel Defense Forces denied the report in a statement to ABC News, saying "not only does the report ignore clear and explicit evidence that Hamas exploits humanitarian aid to sustain its fighting capabilities, it goes so far as to criticize the IDF for routing decisions made specifically to protect humanitarian staff and shipments." The IDF added that when it "directs aid deliveries along specific routes, it is based on the operational reality and intelligence assessments, aimed at safeguarding both the aid and the humanitarian actors — precisely the issue the report claims is not being addressed." The State Department is also pushing back forcefully on the analysis, which was first reported by Reuters, as well as media coverage related to the matter. A State Department spokesperson called it "astonishing" that "the media is busy debating whether the masterminds of Oct. 7 are somehow too principled to loot." "There is endless video evidence of Hamas looting, not to mention members of the aid-industrial complex who have admitted that looting exists by reporting it as 'self-distribution,' in a poor attempt at an aid corruption coverup," the spokesperson said. "Available intelligence confirms what is reflected in open-source information: that a significant portion of non-GHF aid trucks have been diverted, looted, stolen, or 'self-distributed.'" Despite this, the Trump administration -- a staunch ally of Israel -- has provided no evidence of Hamas carrying out widespread aid diversion to date. The IDF said it is "making tremendous efforts to enable the safe distribution of humanitarian aid under complex operational conditions." The ongoing Gaza war erupted after Hamas led a surprise terror attack on southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, killing 1,200 people there and taking 251 others hostage, according to figures from the Israeli government. Since then, Israeli forces have killed more than 59,000 people in Gaza, according to data released by the strip's Hamas-run Ministry of Health.