Israel-Iran war spotlights MAGA divide
President Trump’s handling of escalating tensions in the Middle East is casting a spotlight on divisions among the president's supporters about whether the U.S. should have any involvement in a brewing conflict.
Trump has had voices in his ear advocating for differing approaches to Iran as his administration sought to broker an agreement limiting Tehran’s nuclear program.
Figures like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and former Fox News host Tucker Carlson have argued voters backed Trump because he would not involve the nation in foreign conflicts.
Carlson, in his morning newsletter Friday, said Trump is “complicit” in Israel’s attack on Iran and warned the escalating conflict between the two nations could lead the U.S. into war.
“What happens next will define Donald Trump’s presidency,” Carlson wrote.
Other MAGA figures, such as Fox News host Mark Levin, have advocated for a strong response to Iran, which hawkish figures in the MAGA movement see as a grave threat to the security of the U.S. and its key ally, Israel.
All of this puts Trump at a potential crossroads about how to proceed.
“Our focus must not be on seeking regime change or any further escalation of America's involvement. The last thing America needs right now is a new war. Our number one desire must be peace, as quickly as possible,” Charlie Kirk, an influential voice in the MAGA movement, posted Friday on social platform X.
“Israel believed their existence was at stake, and they acted accordingly and impressively,” Kirk added. “This is Israel’s fight to finish as they see fit, not America’s.”
Some Trump allies suggested to The Hill that Israel's strikes gave Trump an opening to split the difference among his supporters.
His more hawkish backers who favored action against Iran have celebrated the strikes and credited, in part, Trump’s support for Israel.
“Thanks to our great leader, President Trump, whose support for Israel and world peace has never wavered,” Levin posted on X. “He’s a truly historic and iconic figure.”
Trump allies also suggested those who have warned against getting entangled in a foreign conflict could find reason to breathe a sigh of relief. They pointed to the fact that the U.S. was not involved in the strikes and to Trump’s continued openness to brokering a deal with Tehran.
“Two months ago I gave Iran a 60 day ultimatum to ‘make a deal.’ They should have done it! Today is day 61,” Trump posted Friday on Truth Social. “I told them what to do, but they just couldn’t get there. Now they have, perhaps, a second chance!”
Trump has built a durable and loyal political following on a foreign policy that favors steering clear of foreign conflicts and emphasizing an “America First” approach. The president campaigned in 2024 on a pledge to end conflicts around the world, specifically in Ukraine and in the Middle East, where Israel and Hamas were at war.
Trump’s Cabinet in his first term featured more hawkish figures like John Bolton, who served for roughly a year as national security adviser, and Mike Pompeo, who had separate stints as CIA director and secretary of State.
Bolton said Friday it was time for regime change in Iran, while Pompeo called Israel’s strikes “righteous and necessary.”
Trump’s top aides during his second term have focused more on outreach and avoiding conflicts. One of his closest confidantes is Steve Witkoff, a businessman and special envoy for Middle East affairs who has been at the center of peace negotiations in both Ukraine and the Middle East.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has long been seen as a foreign policy hawk who has been particularly tough on China and Iran. But during his time as Trump’s top diplomat, Rubio has aligned himself closely with Trump’s “America First” agenda.
The president had last month extended an olive branch to Iran during a visit to the Middle East, insisting he wanted to see Tehran thrive economically. He even suggested the two sides had “sort of” agreed to a nuclear deal.
But that optimism gave way to tougher rhetoric in the days leading up to Israel’s strikes. Trump described Iran as “more aggressive” in negotiations and was adamant that Tehran could not enrich uranium as part of any agreement.
As reports swirled about looming strikes against Iran, accentuated by news that the U.S. was evacuating some personnel from the Middle East, prominent MAGA voices appeared on edge about the potential for conflict.
Kirk wrote Thursday morning, before Israel had carried out its attack on Iran, that a U.S. strike against Tehran would “cause a massive schism in MAGA and potentially disrupt our momentum and our insanely successful Presidency.”
Days earlier, Carlson had accused Levin, his former Fox News colleague, of “lobbying for war with Iran.” Levin hit back by accusing Carlson of “planting stories.”
Levin has taken a victory lap in the wake of Israel’s strikes against Iran, mocking Carlson as “Chatsworth Qatarlson.”
“This battle is not over. It just began,” Levin said Friday. “Please continue your prayers and support for the good guys, the Israelis, and our magnificent armed forces in the region.”
