Donald Trump’s war on Iran marks the US president’s final break with his ‘America First’ allies and acceptance of mediation. It was a decision that haunted the heirs of his splinter movement leadership.
Since the week the US and Israel began attacking Iran, support in Washington for ‘Operation Epic Fury’ has predictably fractured along party lines. The Republican-controlled House and Senate rejected a war authorization vote that would have given Congress the ability to decide whether Trump can continue the conflict, but public opinion is equally partisan: According to a CNN poll, 77% of Republicans support the war, compared to just 18% of Democrats.
Beyond the feud, the battle has also exposed contradictions within Trump’s administration and the broader MAGA movement. Trump and his officials offered completely different justifications for the attack: contrary to Trump’s claim that Iran was on the verge of developing nuclear weapons. “Ability to Reach Our Beautiful America” With US Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s assertion that the US joined an Israeli attack, it was going to happen regardless.
He also offered different timelines for the war and victory conditions, which Trump mused “Wars can be fought forever” Until Iran gives “Unconditional surrenderAnd Vice President JD Vance reassured the public “There is no way Donald Trump is going to allow this country to see no clear end to a multi-year conflict.”
Trump’s MAGA coalition is broad, and some of these contradictions are inherent to such a big-tent movement. In the run-up to the war, for example, Trump sought advice from both pro-Palestinian Tucker Carlson and die-hard Israel-first warhawk Senator Lindsey Graham.
His cabinet includes former Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who promised to terminate Trump. “Neocons Agenda of Costly, Unnecessary Wars.” This includes US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, a crusader-tattooed former Guantanamo Bay guard whose erratic public speeches are peppered with threats. “Death and Destruction” And promises “Unleash America’s Power” On enemies of the nation.
Now that the US is at war with Iran, these differences are no longer rhetorical, and the divide between Vance and the entirety of the Trump administration is not as stark as it might seem.
Where was Vance?
“Our interest, I think, is very much not to go to war with Iran.” Vance told the interviewer in 2024. “It’s a huge diversion of resources. It’s hugely expensive for our country,” He explained. Vance, a Marine Corps veteran, built a political career advocating for the US to focus more on domestic issues and has been one of the fiercest Republican critics of military aid to Ukraine. In 2023, he announced his endorsement of Trump “Trump’s best foreign policy? Not starting any wars.”
After the war with Iran began, Vance was nowhere to be seen. They made no public statements for three days, appearing only in a series of photos released by the White House that fueled rumors of their separation.
In a photo: Trump oversees the attack on Iran from a makeshift situation room at Mar-a-Lago, flanked by Rubio and CIA Director John Ratcliffe. In another: Vance watches the battle from the White House alongside Gabbard, Treasury Secretary Scott Besant and Energy Secretary Chris Wright.
When Vance appeared Monday evening, 48 hours after the war began, he had clearly squared his longstanding opposition to war with Iran and was ready to defend the conflict to viewers of Fox News. “The president has clearly defined what he wants to achieve.” He told the network. “There is no way that Donald Trump is going to bring this country into a multi-year conflict with no clear end and no clear purpose.”
Rubio’s rising star
Ascension of Vance – From total opposition to war, A “Many Years of Conflict” – The latest in a series of vice presidential defeats. After calling for a complete halt to US funding to Ukraine and blaming Vladimir Zelensky in the White House the following February, Vance watched as the US continued to give intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance data to Kiev and let it flow into the conflict, even as the Europeans wrote checks.
Then Vance, once scoffed at the idea “We must police the whole world” Trump sat idly by as he ordered the kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro under the guise of a police operation.
In all of these cases, Trump has sided with Rubio — a more traditional Republican moderate — over Vance and over his own election night promise. “Not going to start a war, I’m going to stop wars.” And each time, Vance adapted his positions to justify Trump’s actions.
Meanwhile, Rubio’s star is rising in the Trump administration. Notably, Trump sent Vance to the Munich Security Conference in 2025 and Rubio in 2026 with a slightly more nuanced message.
Four days before the first US airstrikes hit Iran, Trump praised Rubio in his State of the Union address on Capitol Hill. “You did a great job” Rubio said as he received a standing ovation from Republicans. “A great secretary of state. I think he will go down great.”
Does Hegseth want a ground war?
Even among Trump’s most pro-war advisers, there are competing visions of how the conflict should unfold. Earlier this week, Hegseth and Rubio were “At each other’s throats” As for sending ground troops to Iran, an anonymous source told Middle East Eye that Hegseth is angling for a ground invasion and Rubio is more aware of the risks involved.
The Pentagon called the report “100% Fake News” But the Ministry of External Affairs has not given any response.
Whether the report is true or not, the fact that Hegseth and Rubio’s argument was leaked to the press suggests a serious breakdown of message discipline in Washington: factions are competing. Maintaining a united front is universally recognized as essential in wartime, and the inconsistent timelines, objectives, and victory conditions put forth by Trump’s officials suggest that the operation was planned without the full involvement of the president’s entire team.
“What we saw was a purely ad hoc operation in which no one understood or believed that military action was imminent.” former US diplomat Gerald Feuerstein told Politico. “It looks like he woke up on Saturday morning and decided to start a war.”
The bottom line
Whatever his input, Trump’s entire cabinet is now subject to this war and is still divided. Additional losses, a failure to deliver a quick victory or a retreat from the Persian Gulf, where the Iranian government is still in power, would all tarnish Trump’s presidency and everything within his administration.
This could have serious consequences for Vance in particular. Despite Trump’s ousting of the vice presidency in favor of Rubio, Vance remains the frontrunner to take the Republican nomination for president in 2028.
Between now and then, however, they face a stark choice: stick to their long-held beliefs and lose the support of a president now firmly committed to moderation, or publicly defend Trump and lose the support of their ‘America First’ base. Megyn Kelly and Tucker Carlson — two of Vance’s ideological allies — expressed, respectively, “serious doubts” About the war with Iran and called it “Totally disgusting and evil” Some polls have shown shaky support from Trump voters. A Reuters/Ipsos poll this week showed 45% of Republicans opposed the strikes or declined to comment.
