Follow us on social

Shutterstock_2041380377-e1655288934143

Americans aren’t very happy about Biden’s Middle East visit: poll

No matter how the question was phrased, less than a quarter of Americans approve of the president's trip to Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Middle East

President Joe Biden is set to make his first visit to the Middle East next week, with stops in Israel and Saudi Arabia. The trip was never going to be simple from a PR perspective. After all, Biden campaigned on making Saudi Arabia a “pariah,” and his stopover in Israel comes just after U.S. officials said Tel Aviv was “​​likely responsible” for the death of Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh.

If a recent poll is to be believed, the trip risks becoming a public relations disaster. Biden’s official justification is that the trip is important for Israeli national security, and he is likely to highlight Saudi Arabia’s importance as an oil exporter if pushed on his much-softened stance toward the Gulf monarchy. As it turns out, neither of these framings is a winner for the president.

The University of Maryland survey broke a sample of 2208 Americans into three groups, each of which was presented with a different framing for the visit. A neutral phrasing showed ambivalence about the trip, with 24 percent approval and 25 percent disapproval. 

But when pollsters told the second group that Biden’s visit was about protecting Israeli national security — a historically airtight justification for U.S. policy in the region — disapproval actually went up, jumping from 25 to 31 percent, while approval stayed flat. And a lot of that movement came from Biden’s own party, highlighting Israel’s damaged image among Democrats.

A focus on Israeli security “doesn’t seem to help [Biden] sell his trip,” Shibley Telhami, who conducted the poll, wrote in the Washington Post. “In fact, it may be hurting him among his Democratic constituency.”

The third group got a harsher framing, emphasizing Biden’s “pariah” comments while also noting Riyadh’s importance to “the global energy market.” Unsurprisingly, this was the least popular justification for the trip, earning 33 percent disapproval and 23 percent approval.

Of course, the poll does present one silver lining for the Biden administration: A plurality of respondents from each group answered “I don’t know” or “I neither approve nor disapprove,” meaning that many Americans remain on the fence about the trip.

But ambivalence is a double-edged sword. Neither the second nor the third framing was as harsh as it could have been. No specific human rights concerns were mentioned, and pollsters left out any reference to Abu Akleh’s killing and the Saudi state-sanctioned murder of Jamal Khashoggi. 

With just a few days left before the trip, only time will tell if widespread disinterest will turn into ire.


President Joe Biden exits Air Force One. (Shutterstock/Chris Allan)
Middle East
Rand Paul Donald Trump
Top photo credit: Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) (Shutterstock/Mark Reinstein) and President Trump (White House/Molly Riley)

Rand Paul to Trump: Don't 'abandon' MAGA over Maduro regime change

Washington Politics

Sen. Rand Paul said on Friday that “all hell could break loose” within Donald Trump’s MAGA coalition if the president involves the U.S. further in Ukraine, and added that his supporters who voted for him after 20 years of regime change wars would "feel abandoned" if he went to war and tried to topple Nicolas Maduro, too.

President Trump has been getting criticism from some of his supporters for vowing to release the files of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and then reneging on that promise. Paul said that the Epstein heat Trump is getting from MAGA will be nothing compared to if he refuses to live up to his “America First” foreign policy promises.

keep readingShow less
Trump ASEAN
Top photo credit: U.S. President Donald Trump looks at Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., next to Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim when posing for a family photo with leaders at the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, October 26, 2025. Vincent Thian/Pool via REUTERS

‘America First’ meets ‘ASEAN Way’ in Kuala Lumpur

Asia-Pacific

The 2025 ASEAN and East Asia Summits in Kuala Lumpur beginning today are set to be consequential multilateral gatherings — defining not only ASEAN’s internal cohesion but also the shape of U.S.–China relations in the Indo-Pacific.

President Donald Trump’s participation will be the first by a U.S. president in an ASEAN-led summit since 2022. President Biden skipped the last two such summits in 2023 and 2024, sending then-Vice President Harris instead.

keep readingShow less
iran, china, russia
Top photo credit: Top image credit: Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi shake hands as Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu looks on during their meet with reporters after their meeting at Diaoyutai State Guest House on March 14, 2025 in Beijing, China. Lintao Zhang/Pool via REUTERS

'Annulled'! Russia won't abide snapback sanctions on Iran

Middle East

“A raider attack on the U.N. Security Council.” This was the explosive accusation leveled by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov this week. His target was the U.N. Secretariat and Western powers, whom he blamed for what Russia sees as an illegitimate attempt to restore the nuclear-related international sanctions on Iran.

Beyond the fiery rhetoric, Ryabkov’s statement contained a message: Russia, he said, now considers all pre-2015 U.N. sanctions on Iran, snapped back by the European signatories of the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) — the United Kingdom, France, Germany — “annulled.” Moscow will deepen its military-technical cooperation with Tehran accordingly, according to Ryabkov.

This is more than a diplomatic spat; it is the formal announcement of a split in international legal reality. The world’s major powers are now operating under two irreconcilable interpretations of international law. On one side, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany assert that the sanctions snapback mechanism of the JCPOA was legitimately triggered for Iran’s alleged violations. On the other, Iran, Russia, and China reject this as an illegitimate procedural act.

This schism was not inevitable, and its origin reveals a profound incongruence. The Western powers that most frequently appeal to the sanctity of the "rules-based international order" and international law have, in this instance, taken an action whose effects fundamentally undermine it. By pushing through a legal maneuver that a significant part of the Security Council considers illegitimate, they have ushered the world into a new and more dangerous state. The predictable, if imperfect, framework of universally recognized Security Council decisions is being replaced by a system where legal facts are determined by political interests espoused by competing power blocs.

This rupture followed a deliberate Western choice to reject compromises in a stand-off with Iran. While Iran was in a technical violation of the provisions of the JCPOA — by, notably, amassing a stockpile of highly enriched uranium (up to 60% as opposed to the 3.67% for a civilian use permissible under the JCPOA), there was a chance to avert the crisis. In the critical weeks leading to the snapback, Iran had signaled concessions in talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Cairo, in terms of renewing cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog’s inspectors.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.