Israelis war-weary but most oppose Iran ceasefire, poll suggests
Israelis War-Wearied, Yet Two-Thirds Oppose Iran Ceasefire, Poll Indicates
Liat Zvi, standing beside the shattered windows and cracked walls of her Tel Aviv apartment, expresses a common sense of frustration. “It’s exhausting… we’ve endured war for over two years, and this feels like another cycle,” she remarks. Six weeks prior, her central neighborhood was hit by an Iranian missile that bypassed Israel’s layered air defenses, striking a residential building and killing Mary Anne Velasquez de Vera, a 32-year-old Filipino caregiver. This marked the first fatality in Israel during the conflict with Iran, which is currently on a fragile pause. Zvi, like many Israelis, questions the conflict’s impact and struggles to envision what lies ahead. “Looking forward feels overwhelming—it’s really challenging,” she admits.
Public Sentiment Reflects Divergence
A new survey from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem highlights Israel’s growing fatigue with the war. However, it also reveals that two-thirds of respondents support the current tentative agreement between Washington and Tehran. The majority of those surveyed believe neither Iran nor Hezbollah in Lebanon have been significantly weakened by recent US and Israeli strikes. When asked to describe their current feelings, a third of participants chose “despair,” followed by “confusion” and “anger,” with “hope” ranking fourth.
“If we don’t dismantle Iran’s proxies here, then this ceasefire means nothing,” Zvi says at home. “You need to arrive at the negotiating table as strong as possible.”
Despite skepticism about the war’s success, opinions on whether Israel should continue attacking Iran are split. Nearly 40% of respondents argue that strikes on Tehran must persist, while 41.4% advocate for respecting the ceasefire. The poll, which surveyed 1,312 Israelis (1,084 Jews, 228 Arabs) on April 9 and 10, notes that Arab participants were less likely to support renewed strikes, with fewer than a fifth favoring them.
Lebanon’s Role in the Ceasefire Remains Contested
The conflict with Hezbollah has become a separate issue for many Israelis. Zvi emphasizes that peace should only come if Hezbollah surrenders its weapons. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem’s findings align with this view, showing most Israelis agree Lebanon should not be part of the Iran ceasefire. Israel, supported by the United States, insists the fight against Hezbollah is distinct from the Iran war, necessitating the eradication of threats on the northern border.
Pakistan, which mediated the ceasefire, included Lebanon in the agreement, as did Iran, which warned of resuming attacks if Israeli strikes continue. Direct talks between Lebanon and Israel are set to begin in Washington DC, though they are expected to yield limited progress. These negotiations, between nations without formal diplomatic ties, represent a symbolic step forward, but many doubt they will result in major breakthroughs. Netanyahu, who agreed to the talks after reportedly being urged by Trump to scale back attacks on Lebanon following the ceasefire’s initiation, remains committed to reshaping the Middle East.
The Lebanese health ministry reported over 350 casualties—more than a third women and children—during the air strikes last Wednesday. The toll underscores the ongoing human cost of the conflict, even as political divisions persist.
