How do the public respond to cooperative signals from a foreign adversary during rapprochement? Previous research has mainly focused on individual signals and personal dispositions, often neglecting the significance of broader patterns across a series of cooperative actions. Given that rapprochement involves multiple signals over time, our study fills this gap by exploring how various patterns of cooperation shape expectations of future behavior. We argue that patterns suggesting an adversary’s ongoing cooperation in future increase public support for the peace process by reducing skepticism about the rival's intentions. Using an original survey experiment in the United States, we find that Americans who learn about a foreign adversary's consistent and increasingly cooperative actions are more likely to perceive it as a trustworthy partner and support conciliatory policies. This study sheds light on the failure of rapprochement efforts that begin with a promising event but ultimately deteriorate due to declining public support for cooperation between rivals.