Amid a tenuous 14-day ceasefire between the United States and Iran, a former senior adviser to Biden-era Secretary of State Antony Blinken says the big winners from the war may be Russia and China.
“What Russia and China are gleaning from this is that a country like Iran can hold its own against the United States,” Melissa Toufanian tells Independence Avenue Media. “While we have a powerful military that was able to conduct strikes to take out the Ayatollah, the leader of Iran, when it comes to forcing a country into a regime change, that is far less feasible.”
Russia has also benefited from the rising cost of oil and a temporary sanctions waiver, which has created a windfall to replenish its war budget.
Perhaps as importantly, says Toufanian, now managing director at Navigator Research, the war has created “unnecessary tension” with U.S. allies and partners.
U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly lashed out at NATO allies, threatening to quit the alliance over a perceived lack of support for his war effort. European allies themselves have complained of a trust deficit with the administration.
READ MORE: Former U.S. Ambassador to NATO : U.S. Exit Would Be ‘Devastating’
Toufanian says her polling firm pegs support for the war in the U.S. at about 40% — aligning closely with approval of Trump. But, she says, more Americans want the president to focus on improving the cost of living.
The following interview, recorded on April 9, 2026, has been edited for length and clarity.
Kiryl Sukhotski, Independence Avenue Media: Where do you think the U.S. administration finds itself now in the war in Iran? What options do they have — and out of those options, which of them may they realistically pursue?
Melissa Toufanian, former senior adviser to U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken: Well, as we heard yesterday [April 8, 2026], the United States is pursuing a ceasefire. But what I would say is, based on the reports that we heard after the ceasefire was announced, what we’re not seeing is a ceasefire, but what we’re seeing is actually a mess.
I think what we are seeing with Iran and the United States is that the United States is in a weaker position today than it was at the start of the war. The goals that it set out have been shifting consistently. What we have heard from the U.S. president and from the vice president is that they wanted a complete obliteration of Iran’s missile program, that they wanted to weaken Iranian proxies. Those things have not happened.
Iran retains the ability to continue its missile program. While it may have been hindered, it is still a threat to the region. We don’t know the status of the nuclear program. I think the Iranian proxies can still project power, as we’re seeing with the fight in Lebanon between Hezbollah and Israel.
And I think what’s most important is that the Iranian regime has survived. And I think what we are seeing — only time will tell — is that it perhaps has even turned into more of a hard-line regime than what we began with when the president of the United States and [Prime Minister] Netanyahu from Israel decided to launch this war.
IAM: You describe this as a mess. So what can the Trump administration do now to actually get out of this mess?
Toufanian: I hope that the administration takes the diplomatic talks seriously, whether it’s mediated through Pakistan or through other intermediaries. I think the most important thing for the administration is to end this war, to bring the additional U.S. troops that it sent to the region home, to focus on lowering the gas prices, oil prices, the cost of goods that has escalated because of this war, to focus on that.
This war, in my view, has been unnecessary, it’s been dangerous, it didn’t need to happen in the first place. So focus on an off-ramp, de-escalate, reduce the threats to civilians in the region, reduce the threats to Americans at home. So I hope that diplomatic talks are successful and that we see this war come to an end as soon as possible. And I hope that we can find an outcome that leaves the United States and those in the region safer, although I’m not optimistic about that.
IAM: But with this off-ramp, could it be considered by allies or indeed adversaries as — if not an American defeat, at least the absence of American victory?
Toufanian: I think the absence of American victory is spot on. The United States is in a weaker position today. I think its adversaries — whether China, Russia or others — have watched what’s happened. I think that when it comes to Russia, and particularly to Vladimir Putin, he would like nothing more than to see the U.S. bogged down in yet another conflict in the Middle East — a prolonged, costly, unpopular conflict.
I think also what Russia and China are gleaning from this is that a country like Iran can hold its own against the United States. That while we have a powerful military that was able to conduct strikes to take out the Ayatollah, the leader of Iran, when it comes to forcing a country into a regime change, that is far less feasible, far less doable.
So I think that what our adversaries saw from this is some weakness from the United States — and for the United States it was completely unnecessary and it was a war of choice that the president and Netanyahu decided to pursue, and exposed this weakness that I think our adversaries are learning from.
IAM: You mentioned Russia — so what new cards does this give Vladimir Putin and the Kremlin to play in terms of their relationship with the United States and with the West?
Toufanian: Well, I think what we’re seeing that’s really interesting is that because of what’s happened with Iran blocking the Strait of Hormuz and essentially putting our global economy in a chokehold, we’ve seen the oil and gas prices increase.
We saw the U.S. lift sanctions on Russian oil, allowing Russia to then profit from the sale of that additional oil — and Russia then could use that money to fight the war in Ukraine.
So essentially, we are alleviating the pressure of the increased oil prices by having lifted those sanctions on Russia, but it then provides additional economic support for Russia to then invest in the war in Ukraine. So I think that Russia has ultimately benefited from the war with Iran and has been able to see the U.S. in a position of weakness.
IAM: So where does it leave the war in Ukraine and U.S.-led attempts to negotiate a peace solution?
Toufanian: I think it’s hard to tell at this point what this would mean vis-a-vis Ukraine. I hope that there can be a diplomatic solution in Ukraine as well. I think that it’s really important for the United States to work with allies and partners when it comes to a diplomatic solution in Ukraine.
But I think what we are also seeing is that when the U.S. went to allies and partners in Europe and around the world to ask for support for the war in the Middle East, that our allies and partners were not eager to jump in and support it. It’s almost the complete opposite of what we saw with Ukraine when allies and partners were rallied together to support Ukraine.
So I think this underscores a point that the United States has created unnecessary tension with our allies and partners, particularly our European allies and partners, by demanding their support for the war in the Middle East, to ask them to partake in this unnecessary, unpopular war, which understandably their own publics would not be supportive of engaging in, of putting their own service members at risk if they were to send troops.
That has created tension with our allies and partners, and I hope it doesn’t affect levels of support for Ukraine. I don’t think it will, but I think that any tension with allies and partners is not helpful overall, especially when we are going to go to them in the future to ask for support for different initiatives. That puts them in a really tough spot.
IAM: You’ve mentioned the public support. As somebody who served in the previous administration and who’s now involved in American public opinion research, what is your take on the mood of the broader American public when it comes to this?
Toufanian: What we see from Navigator Research and our own polling is that since the start of the war, the support for the war has remained at about 40% of the American public. About 60% of the American public does not view this war favorably.
But what I think is really interesting is that it aligns very closely with support overall for President Trump. He’s at about a little under 60% disapproval rating, about 40% approval rating. But when we ask Americans, what are they worried about, what are their concerns when it comes to this war, they are very concerned about being bogged down in yet another prolonged conflict: that this could be billions of dollars of U.S. taxpayer money spent on a conflict in the Middle East and that’s money that’s not being spent on issues at home.
And people want to see their elected officials focus on these issues. They want to see President Trump and Republicans in Congress and others actually lowering their costs, figuring out ways to do that, addressing the economic needs, and not engaging in a war that is actually raising their prices.
Many Americans who were coming of age during 9/11, they have known war in the Middle East for most of their lives, whether it’s war in Afghanistan, in Iraq, conflict with Libya, and so many other places, and they don’t want to experience that. They just want to experience lower costs at home. They want better economic conditions at home.
