Spars and strikes: Who backs Iran war? - The Intelligence from The Economist Recap

Podcast: The Intelligence from The Economist

Published: 2026-03-05

Duration: 22 min

Summary

The episode discusses the ongoing military action against Iran, highlighting the political implications for Donald Trump and the divided opinions among American senators, as well as the cautious responses from international allies.

What Happened

As the conflict in Iran escalates with Operation Epic Fury now in its sixth day, the podcast delves into the political dynamics of the situation. America appears to be winning decisively, with Secretary of War Pete Hegseth emphasizing military successes. However, the Senate's attempt to invoke the War Powers Act reveals a significant partisan divide, with Democrats pushing back against Trump’s military actions. Adam Roberts, the Economist's foreign editor, outlines how this represents a stark shift from Trump's previous anti-war stance to a more aggressive military approach, raising concerns among his original supporters about the implications of this war in the Middle East.

Public support for the war remains low, with only about 30-40% of Americans in favor, contrasting sharply with the overwhelming support seen during earlier conflicts like the invasion of Afghanistan. The episode notes that while there has been some rallying around the flag among Republican supporters, it is still historically low. Additionally, the podcast examines the response of America's traditional allies, many of whom are hesitant to support military actions, fearing economic repercussions and instability in the region. The reluctance among European nations and Gulf allies to provide military bases or support the initial attacks underscores a cautious approach toward the conflict.

The episode also touches on the potential for broader involvement, with NATO allies preparing to deploy naval assets closer to the conflict zone. Adam Roberts highlights an incident where Iran attempted to provoke Turkey, a NATO ally, by launching a missile towards it. This act could have escalated the situation significantly had it caused damage to American bases. Looking ahead, the podcast suggests that while operational successes may continue, there remains a lack of clarity regarding the ultimate goals of this military action, raising questions about the long-term implications for U.S. foreign policy and international relations.

Key Insights

Key Questions Answered

What is Operation Epic Fury?

Operation Epic Fury refers to the ongoing military campaign against Iran, which has entered its sixth day. The U.S. is reportedly having significant military successes, with officials claiming to take out many of Iran's missile launchers and degrading its military capabilities.

How has Donald Trump's approach to foreign policy changed?

Trump's current actions represent a significant shift from his 2016 campaign, where he portrayed himself as a peace president opposed to foreign entanglements. The current military actions indicate a readiness to engage in conflict, moving towards a war president stance.

What is the current public opinion regarding the war in Iran?

Public support for the war in Iran is relatively low, with polls indicating only 30-40% of Americans in favor of the military action. This is a stark contrast to the 90% support seen during the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.

How are America's allies responding to the conflict in Iran?

Allies have shown hesitance in fully supporting the U.S. military actions. While Israel has been supportive, many European countries and Gulf allies have been cautious, fearing economic repercussions and instability in the region.

What risks does the Iran conflict pose for NATO countries?

The conflict poses significant risks, especially as Iran has attempted to provoke Turkey, a NATO ally, by launching a missile towards it. Such actions could lead to a broader escalation, especially if they damage American bases that host nuclear weapons.