Peace President Trump’s latest war has a surprise feature!

The famous liberal historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. is often quoted as saying, “All wars are popular for the first 30 days.” (Although I’m having trouble pinpointing the source!)

Still, it’s a reference to the well-known rally-round-the-flag reactions of public opinion when their countries initially go to war. And the wars are invariably for important reasons – or at least that’s the story governments like to tell. In a very recent interview with historian Anne Applebaum, Charlie Sykes addresses the fact that there seems to be little enthusiasm for the initial days of the current Iran War.

John Kenneth Galbraith had this explanation for the phenomenon of initial enthusiasm:

Almost any military venture receives strong popular approval in the short run; the citizenry rallies to the flag and to the forces engaged in combat. The strategy and technology of the new war evoke admiration and applause. This reaction is related not to economics or politics but more deeply to anthropology. As in ancient times, when the drums sound in the distant forest, there is an assured tribal response. It is the rallying beat of the drums, not the virtue of the cause, that is the vital mobilizing force.

But this does not last. It did not as regards the minor [US] adventures in Grenada [1983] and Panama [1989-1990], nor as regards the war with Iraq and Saddam Hussein. The effect of more widespread wars has been almost uniformly adverse [to public support]. (1)

He goes on to recall, “World War I, although it evoked the most powerful of patriotic responses at the time, has passed into history largely as a mindless and pointless slaughter.”

It was a standard part of the historical narrative that was widespread patriotic enthusiasm in Germany for the war in its initial days. In more recent decades, historians Holger Afflerbach and Gordon Martel have provided a more cautious evaluation, emphasizing that the Kaiser’s government felt the need to heavily promote patriotic enthusiasm.

But, anthropology or not, there doesn’t seem to be the usual enthusiasm among the American public that we would expect to see at the beginning of such a conflict, which has huge implications for the US and the Middle East.

Six out of ten Americans disapprove of U.S. military action against Iran, according to a new CNN survey. Fifty-six percent of Americans think the president is too willing to use military force, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll fielded over the weekend. If public opinion had a strong bearing on U.S. foreign policy, then this would be a blinking-red indicator that the new war is neither sustainable nor desirable—an all-around destructive campaign.

That the president has failed to make a coherent argument in favor of the Iran strikes, to seek congressional approval, or to make any outreach to the public may well end up backfiring. (2)

John Mearsheimer ably explains what a bad idea for the US the current war on Iran is. He now describes Trump as a “unilateralist” in foreign policy. (3)



Notes:

(1) Galbraith, John Kenneth (1992): The Culture of Contentment, 166-167. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

(2) Guyer, Jonathan (2026): The Blowback From an Unpopular Iran War. The American Prospect 03/03/2026. (Accessed: 2026-03-03).

(3) Prof. John Mearsheimer: Is Trump’s War Beyond Control? Judge Napolitano - Judging Freedom YouTube channel 03/03/2026. (Accessed: 2026-03-03).