Polls: Israelis Favor Resuming War with Iran, Netanyahu Likely to Lose Election

Israeli soldiers on the border with the southern Lebanon village of Bint Jbeil, seen from the Israeli side of the border on 10 April 2026, as the Israeli military continues its targeting operations in southern Lebanon. (EPA)
Israeli soldiers on the border with the southern Lebanon village of Bint Jbeil, seen from the Israeli side of the border on 10 April 2026, as the Israeli military continues its targeting operations in southern Lebanon. (EPA)
TT

Polls: Israelis Favor Resuming War with Iran, Netanyahu Likely to Lose Election

Israeli soldiers on the border with the southern Lebanon village of Bint Jbeil, seen from the Israeli side of the border on 10 April 2026, as the Israeli military continues its targeting operations in southern Lebanon. (EPA)
Israeli soldiers on the border with the southern Lebanon village of Bint Jbeil, seen from the Israeli side of the border on 10 April 2026, as the Israeli military continues its targeting operations in southern Lebanon. (EPA)

Three opinion polls conducted in Tel Aviv on Friday showed that an overwhelming majority of Israelis view the war against Iran and Lebanon’s Hezbollah as a failure for US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, while supporting a resumption of the fighting to achieve the objectives announced at the outset.

Most respondents gave low ratings to the political leadership, in contrast to their assessment of the military leadership. On potential Knesset election results, the polls suggested the war would not save Netanyahu from losing power.

The surveys were published by Israel’s public broadcaster Kan 11 and Channel 12, while the third was jointly conducted by Maariv and the Walla news website.

In the Maariv and Walla poll, 46% said the United States and Israel had not won the war, compared with 22% who said they had, while 32% said it was too early to judge.

In the Kan 11 poll, 58% of Israelis said the United States and Israel had not won, while only 25% said they had.

Some 56% of respondents said Tel Aviv should have continued the war, while only about a quarter said the ceasefire had been the right step for Israel.

In the Channel 12 poll, only 30% said Israel and the United States had won, while 19% said Iran had won. About 40% said neither side had prevailed, and 11% said they did not know.

Asked whether they supported a ceasefire with Iran, 53% said they opposed it, compared with 30% who supported it.

Among those intending to vote for the governing coalition, 57% opposed the ceasefire and 25% supported it. Among opposition voters, 62% opposed it and 26% supported it.

Resumption of the war

Asked whether the conflict with Iran would resume, most Israelis said they believed it would, according to the Channel 12 poll.

Some 45% said the war would resume within two weeks after the ceasefire ends, while 26% said it would resume within a few months to a year.

Seven percent said it would resume after more than a year, while only 6% said it would not resume, and 16% said they did not know.

In the same poll, respondents were asked whether Israel should continue the war in Lebanon. An overwhelming majority, about 79%, said it should, while 13% said it should not.

Performance assessment

In the Maariv and Walla poll, respondents were asked about the US president’s performance in the war. Some 52% said they were satisfied, while 43% said they were not.

According to the Kan 11 poll, Israeli military chief Eyal Zamir was seen as having managed the war well, while the prime minister and his defense minister, Israel Katz, were not.

Half of the respondents said Netanyahu had not managed the war well, compared with 45% who said he had. Katz also received a low rating: 52% said his performance was poor, and 37% said it was good.

By contrast, 69% said Zamir had managed the war against Iran well, while 23% disagreed.

David Barnea, head of the Mossad, was rated positively by 57%, while 18% said he had not managed the war well.

In the Maariv poll, 46% said they were satisfied with Netanyahu, while 49% said they were not. Some 71% said they were satisfied with Zamir, 40% with Katz, and 29% with Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich.

Israeli Air Force commander Tomer Bar received the highest rating, with 77% expressing support, while only 14% said they were dissatisfied.

Election outlook

In the Channel 12 poll, respondents were asked who was best suited to serve as prime minister. The results showed Netanyahu still ahead of all rivals, though former military chief Gadi Eisenkot was narrowing the gap. In a direct contest, Netanyahu led 39% to 35%.

However, if elections were held today, all three polls indicated Netanyahu would lose power. The ruling coalition would fall from its current 68 seats to 49-51, while the opposition would win 59-61 seats, including Arab parties projected to secure 10.



Iran Says It Has Conveyed Conditions to Re-Engage in Talks, End War with US

 Women draped in Iranian flags march during the state-organized military-style parade in Tehran, Iran, Friday, Sept. 18, 2026. (AP)
Women draped in Iranian flags march during the state-organized military-style parade in Tehran, Iran, Friday, Sept. 18, 2026. (AP)
TT

Iran Says It Has Conveyed Conditions to Re-Engage in Talks, End War with US

 Women draped in Iranian flags march during the state-organized military-style parade in Tehran, Iran, Friday, Sept. 18, 2026. (AP)
Women draped in Iranian flags march during the state-organized military-style parade in Tehran, Iran, Friday, Sept. 18, 2026. (AP)

‌Iran has conveyed its conditions to mediators for re-engaging in negotiations aimed at ending the war with the ‌US, Al ‌Jazeera cited ‌Iran's ⁠Security Chief Mohsen Rezaei ⁠as saying in an interview on Saturday.

The conditions ⁠include ending the ‌war ‌on all ‌fronts, unfreezing Iranian ‌funds and ending the naval blockade, Rezaei said, adding ‌that consultations were continuing with ⁠Qatari ⁠and Pakistani mediators and that Tehran was awaiting a response from US President Donald Trump.


Trump Says He Is Banning Media Outlets CNN, MS NOW, Politico from White House

The CNN booth at the White House after US President Donald J. Trump announced he would ban CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, from the White House in Washington, D.C., US, September 18, 2026. REUTERS/Evan Vucci
The CNN booth at the White House after US President Donald J. Trump announced he would ban CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, from the White House in Washington, D.C., US, September 18, 2026. REUTERS/Evan Vucci
TT

Trump Says He Is Banning Media Outlets CNN, MS NOW, Politico from White House

The CNN booth at the White House after US President Donald J. Trump announced he would ban CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, from the White House in Washington, D.C., US, September 18, 2026. REUTERS/Evan Vucci
The CNN booth at the White House after US President Donald J. Trump announced he would ban CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, from the White House in Washington, D.C., US, September 18, 2026. REUTERS/Evan Vucci

US President Donald Trump said on Friday he is banning three major news outlets – CNN, MS NOW and Politico – from the White House in his latest threat to the independent press.

The move is almost certain to face legal challenges as free speech experts said it conflicts with the US Constitution's First Amendment protections for free speech and a free press, Reuters said.

Trump accused the outlets of "reporting FAKE NEWS" in a social media post, and said they "shouldn't be able to constantly write or report FICTION and LIES when they're covering the President of the United States." Trump added, "Other Fake News Media Outlets to follow."

Representatives of all three outlets could be seen working in the White House on Friday afternoon following Trump's post. The White House was informing all three they would be banned from the White House grounds as of Saturday, Fox News reported, citing an unnamed senior White House official.

Trump said there was no specific incident that prompted the ban, telling reporters in the Oval Office, "It's really just cumulative stories over the past few years."

Trump added, "I don't have to let them into my, into the people's house."

When asked what he meant by ‌others "to follow," Trump mentioned ‌the New York Times and Washington Post as what he called "fake news."

The extent of the ban announced by ‌Trump ⁠was not immediately clear, ⁠and the legality of any move could depend on its scope.

Courts have given presidents broad discretion over selective access to events such as Oval Office meetings and small press pools, while broader exclusions from generally available White House press facilities or credentials could face stronger challenges under the First Amendment and constitutional protections for due process.

Trump's move came weeks ahead of the November 3 midterm elections in which Trump's fellow Republicans are defending narrow majorities in Congress. Reuters/Ipsos polls show the public souring on Republicans, as Trump's own approval ratings stand near historic lows amid the deeply unpopular Iran war he kicked off that has sent energy prices soaring.

DECADES OF TRADITION

The Trump administration has upended decades of tradition in dealings between the White House and press, cutting back the access many major news organizations have had to the ⁠president while elevating the presence of new media outlets seen as more sympathetic to the administration.

CNN in a statement ‌said it stands behind its journalists who cover the White House.

"We have a right under the ‌US Constitution to do that reporting without hindrance or interference from the government," CNN said in a statement. "Should the ban which President Trump threatened go ahead, it would be ‌an illegal assault on that fundamental and constitutionally protected right."

Politico said on X that it would "continue to fairly report on this White House and future ‌ones."

"We will vigorously defend our First Amendment rights against any attempt to restrict them," Politico said.

MS NOW declined to comment.

"It's difficult to imagine a more blatant violation of the First Amendment than Trump banning news outlets from the People's House for criticizing the government," Seth Stern, chief of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, said in a statement.

Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, said the First Amendment prohibits the president from punishing journalists because he does not like their coverage.

"If ‌President Trump means to expel these news organizations from the White House press pool, his action is doubly unconstitutional because the press pool is a 'public forum' under the First Amendment, which means the president can't exclude ⁠journalists from it on the basis ⁠of their viewpoints," Jaffer said in a statement.

TABLOID HISTORY

Trump rose to fame as a New York developer skilled in getting the city's tabloid newspapers to cover his social life, and went on to build his profile as a reality television personality before making a serious push into politics.

Since his successful 2016 campaign, Trump has regularly criticized the press, stepping up his complaints during his second term in office. He has repeatedly urged broadcasters to drop comedy or news programs he dislikes or which have joked about or criticized him or his administration, calling on the Federal Communications Commission to strip disfavored broadcast stations of their licenses.

Trump has filed several lawsuits against the press, including the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the BBC and the Des Moines Register. The suits can have a chilling effect. His defamation suits against ABC and CBS were settled for $15 million and $16 million, respectively.

In his first term, Trump's White House sought to revoke or suspend the credentials of Playboy correspondent Brian Karem and CNN's Jim Acosta, but federal judges ordered their White House press passes restored.

Since returning to the presidency in January 2025, Trump has openly badgered reporters, particularly from US television networks.

Last year, he also banned the Associated Press from the usual pool of reporters that cover his movements because the news agency did not adopt Trump's preferred name for the Gulf of Mexico, which Trump has instructed executive branch employees to refer to as the Gulf of America.


US and Denmark Reach Deal on Greenland, Trump Says

US President Donald Trump (AFP/Getty)
US President Donald Trump (AFP/Getty)
TT

US and Denmark Reach Deal on Greenland, Trump Says

US President Donald Trump (AFP/Getty)
US President Donald Trump (AFP/Getty)

The United States, Denmark and Greenland have entered into an agreement for the US to develop a significant military presence on Greenland, while prohibiting US adversaries from building their own bases on the island, Donald Trump said on Friday.

In a Truth Social post, the US president wrote that no US enemies would be able to make sensitive investments on the island without the approval of the United States and that the agreement had no expiry date.

"At my direction, we worked with representatives of Denmark and Greenland to guarantee that the United States will FOREVER have the complete ability to do what is necessary ‌in Greenland in order ‌to secure and defend the security of Greenland, and the United States ‌of ⁠America," Trump wrote.

Earlier ⁠on Friday, Reuters exclusively reported that the US and Denmark were closing in on a deal that would result in an increased US military presence in Greenland, an autonomous territory of Denmark, but would stop well short of Trump's long-held dream of acquiring the island for the United States.

The US already has nearly total overflight and basing rights in Greenland due to a 1951 treaty.

Trump's announcement suggests he was nonetheless pleased with the outcome of the negotiations and that he might not revive his territorial claims, at least in the near future. He said, without elaborating, that ⁠the US would soon be rolling out a large military presence on the ‌island, which already hosts one Space Force base in its remote ‌northwest.

"This is a dream come true for the United States of America," Trump wrote.

EXTENT OF AGREEMENT REMAINS UNCLEAR

The Danish ‌prime minister's office said on Friday that the agreement would strengthen North Atlantic and Arctic security.

Greenland's prime ‌minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, said in a statement that the agreement recognized Greenland's interests and the Arctic island's place in international cooperation. "This benefits us all," he said.

Much was unclear as of Friday night, including whether any new US bases would be constructed as a result of the agreement. Trump's Truth Social posts about negotiations or agreements often lack context or specifics.

Imran Bayoumi, ‌a former Pentagon official now with the Atlantic Council think tank, said it would be new if the US can build bases without the approval of ⁠Greenland or Denmark but that ⁠largely "it seems that Washington could have achieved a lot of these objectives through diplomacy and dialogue without straining the broader US-NATO relationship.”

It was also unclear how the agreement would be received in Greenland, an autonomous territory of Denmark. The island's residents aspire to independence and have bristled at US attempts to assert control.

In a separate statement, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that the deal "permanently and completely" addressed Washington's national security concerns with respect to the island.

"Greenland will forever be part of the strategic defense area of North America and exclude any adversary from it and the surrounding area," he wrote.

A State Department official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss specific terms, said the deal prohibits non-NATO countries from building a base in Greenland and will allow only the US and its allies to make unspecified "sensitive investments." The official said the agreement grants the US permanent access, basing and overflight rights, and would continue to apply even if Greenland becomes independent.