60% of Americans Now View Israel Unfavorably — Pew Records All-Time Low

A new Pew Research Center poll finds 60% of American adults now hold an unfavorable view of Israel — up from 53% a year ago and the highest level ever recorded by Pew. The shift is bipartisan and generational: majorities under 50 in both parties now view Israel negatively, with the steepest drops among young Democrats and independents. The poll was conducted during the Iran war and Lebanon campaign, meaning the numbers reflect public reaction to ongoing Israeli military operations. For pro-Israel advocacy, this is the most important domestic data point of the year.

• 60% unfavorable, 37% favorable — a 7-point drop in one year and an all-time low in Pew’s tracking since 2022.
• Majorities under 50 in both parties now rate Israel unfavorably, signaling the erosion has crossed party lines and age cohorts.
• Netanyahu’s numbers are worse than Israel’s — the JPost reports his personal favorability has also hit a new low among U.S. adults.
• The poll was fielded during active Israeli strikes on Iran and Lebanon, meaning the ‘ceasefire’ period data is not yet captured — trajectory could improve or worsen.
• JI notes the numbers reflect compounding effects of the Iran war, Lebanon campaign, and sustained campus antisemitism coverage framing Israel negatively.

This is ICAN’s core strategic threat in numeric form. The political infrastructure supporting pro-Israel advocacy — bipartisan support, electoral cover for lawmakers, donor confidence — is built on public opinion. A 60% unfavorable rating means elected officials from purple districts face no electoral cost for opposing Israel and real cost for defending it. ICAN’s messaging, coalition-building, and state-level legislative strategy all run against this headwind.

The U.S.-Iran ceasefire declared by Trump is already wobbling. Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz again in response to Israel’s massive Lebanon strikes — the heaviest airstrikes of the war — and Iranian officials say continued Israeli operations render ceasefire talks “meaningless.” Israel killed Hezbollah’s chief’s secretary and a senior Lebanese Resistance Brigade commander. Trump says Lebanon is a “separate skirmish” not covered by the Iran deal, while the White House claims victory and warns Iran to comply with a “real agreement” or face renewed war.

• IDF struck Lebanon with its heaviest airstrikes of the war, killing Hezbollah chief Nasrallah’s secretary and a senior commander.
• Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz in response, allowing no more than 15 vessels per day, before partially reopening — a direct economic pressure lever.
• Trump publicly called Lebanon a “separate skirmish,” giving Israel implicit cover to continue; Vance said Lebanon “was never part of the ceasefire deal.”
• JTA reports the ceasefire is “teetering” with Hormuz still partially closed and IDF refusing to stand down in Lebanon.
• Netanyahu said the ceasefire with Iran does not extend to Lebanon and that Israel will continue to strike Hezbollah “wherever necessary.”

The ceasefire’s fragility matters for ICAN’s advocacy environment: if it holds, the pressure to condemn Israel’s Lebanon campaign intensifies in Congress and at the DNC. If it collapses, the political dynamic shifts back toward rallying around Israel’s security. ICAN should monitor the Lebanon front closely as the key variable driving domestic political pressure.

The Democratic National Committee is holding its spring meeting today — and Israel is once again at the center of the fight. DNC members are facing a series of votes testing the party’s official posture on Israel and AIPAC. DNC Chair Ken Martin established a working group on Middle East policy at the last meeting in response to anti-Israel pressure. The current session is expected to force a direct confrontation over whether the DNC officially distances itself from AIPAC-aligned donors and candidates.

• DNC members are voting today on Israel and AIPAC-related resolutions that could signal the party’s official direction on the issue.
• Politico reports the Israel fight is “rearing its head on the party’s biggest stage — again,” with no resolution in sight after months of internal battles.
• The working group on Middle East policy established by Chair Martin is under pressure to produce a posture more critical of Israel.
• The outcome of today’s votes will directly affect ICAN’s target candidate environment in 2026 primaries — a party resolution against AIPAC gives hostile candidates more cover.

ICAN’s 2026 electoral strategy depends on the Democratic Party not formally abandoning pro-Israel positions. Today’s DNC votes are a real-time indicator of how much political cover anti-Israel Democrats will have heading into primaries. A hostile resolution would be a significant escalation requiring an immediate ICAN response.

Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed is refusing to back down from his framing of the Temple Israel terrorist attack, telling Jewish Insider that “hurt people do hurt people” and linking the Hezbollah-inspired attack to “circumstances happening 6,000 miles away.” El-Sayed continues to campaign alongside antisemitic streamer Hasan Piker, who condemned the October 7 attacks only under pressure and previously said “America deserved 9/11.” The JI story, published this morning, is the most direct treatment of El-Sayed’s actual position on the Temple Israel attacker.

• El-Sayed told JI that the Temple Israel attacker was “hurt” by the war in Lebanon — directly contextualizing a domestic terrorist attack as a consequence of Israeli policy.
• Piker returned to the stage at El-Sayed’s rally to a standing ovation, and El-Sayed declined to ask him to disavow his past comments.
• Times of Israel reports Michigan Democrats and Jewish leaders are “uneasy” over El-Sayed’s alliance with Piker, citing concerns about the primary race dynamics.
• El-Sayed dismissed criticism as “platform policing” and “cancel culture,” signaling he will not change course.

El-Sayed is running in a competitive Michigan Democratic primary for U.S. Senate. His explicit defense of contextualizing domestic terrorism as an Israel-policy reaction puts him in a different category than a generic anti-war candidate. This is a direct intelligence product for ICAN’s Michigan electoral strategy.