Trump's Iran War Undermines Both Conservative Foreign-Policy Factions
Trump's aggressive moves in Iran have left both the interventionist neocons and the anti-war restrainers in his circle looking foolish.
Since the 2024 election, rival conservative foreign-policy factions have raced to present Donald Trump as a champion of their divergent visions: the "restrainers," skeptical of intervention and critical of Israel, and the neoconservatives, who view Israel as indispensable and favor military regime change. Both groups have allies inside the administration—JD Vance and Elbridge Colby on the restrainer side, Marco Rubio and Elliott Abrams on the neocon side.
Trump's recent policies, from bombing Iran alongside Israel to a short-lived Venezuelan coup and a fleeting peace deal with Tehran, have undermined each camp, prompting public spats between commentators like John Podhoretz and Curt Mills. The episode shows how Trump's unpredictable moves have left traditional foreign-policy factions scrambling for relevance. The author argues that even Trump's critics have correctly anticipated his erratic behavior, reinforcing the notion that his initiatives often collapse. Overall, the piece warns that relying on Trump to advance any specific foreign-policy agenda is a risky gamble.
Why it matters
It shows how Trump's erratic foreign policy is destabilizing U.S. strategy and confusing allied and opposition groups.
In this story