Vance: ‘No chance’ U.S. will be in drawn-out war in Middle East
As President Trump contemplates military action in Iran, the vice president told the Post he still sees himself as a “skeptic” of overseas military intervention.
ABOARD AIR FORCE TWO — Vice President JD Vance said Thursday that while military strikes against Iran remain under consideration by President Donald Trump, there is “no chance” that such strikes would result in the United States becoming involved in a yearslong, drawn-out war.
Speaking with the Washington Post on Thursday, Vance said he does not know what Trump will decide to do about Iran, describing possibilities that include military strikes “to ensure Iran isn’t going to get a nuclear weapon,” or solving “the problem diplomatically.”
But if Trump proceeds with another round of strikes on Iran — which some U.S. officials have suggested could be more comprehensive than the bombing of nuclear sites in June — Vance said confidently that it would not turn into the kind of conflict the vice president has harshly criticized.
“The idea that we’re going to be in a Middle Eastern war for years with no end in sight — there is no chance that will happen,” he told the Post in an interview as he returned to Washington from an event in Wisconsin, effectively pushing back against predictions by some foreign policy experts that there would be no easy out if America got involved in a bigger conflict with Iran.
Vance noted that last year’s operation in Iran and the January capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro were “very clearly defined.”
Vance, a 41-year-old Marine veteran who served in the Iraq War, once said from the Senate floor that he had been “lied to” about the reasons for the United States’ involvement there. He said Thursday that he still sees himself as a “skeptic of foreign military interventions,” a description he believes continues to apply to Trump.
“I think we all prefer the diplomatic option,” Vance said. “But it really depends on what the Iranians do and what they say.”
Talks between the United States and Iran continued Thursday in Geneva amid a large-scale buildup of U.S. forces around Iran, though no resolution was reached, and mediators said the negotiations would continue next week.
Trump has openly acknowledged that he is interested in bringing about regime change to topple Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, telling reporters this month that it “would be the best thing that could happen.” The current presence of U.S. military forces in the region is among the largest in more than two decades, since before the Iraq War began in 2003.
Asked whether, in his days as a commentator and senator offering criticisms of the Iraq War, he could have foreseen being attached to a presidency interested in bringing about a foreign regime change, the vice president chuckled.
“Well, I mean, look. Life has all kinds of crazy twists and turns,” Vance said. “But I think Donald Trump is an ‘America First’ president, and he pursues policies that work for the American people.
“I do think we have to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past. I also think that we have to avoid overlearning the lessons of the past. Just because one president screwed up a military conflict doesn’t mean we can never engage in military conflict again. We’ve got to be careful about it, but I think the president is being careful.”
Prominent commentators within the conservative movement have spent months publicly quarreling over U.S. involvement in the Middle East, including debating what America’s attitude should be toward Israel.
A growing number of conservatives — particularly young people — have soured on continued military support for the U.S. ally. Traditional conservatives have excoriated some of those voices, meanwhile, fueling a debate on the right about not only foreign policy but antisemitism as well.
Vance has advocated for Israel-skeptical voices to be heard in the intraparty debate — a conversation that has upset Republican dogma of recent decades — while maintaining that he sees the nation as a strategic ally.
The divide was apparent last week when former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who now has his own podcast and frequently criticizes fellow conservatives’ deference to Israel, interviewed Mike Huckabee, the U.S. ambassador to Israel.
Carlson, who has been a close ally of Vance, and Huckabee, a high-profile U.S. diplomat, have each found themselves in hot water for statements made during the filmed discussion. Huckabee said it would “be fine” if Israel took over other Middle Eastern countries whose land is referenced in Scripture, and Carlson suggested genetic testing to determine the true descendants of Abraham.
Vance, an active peruser of X, said he had not yet watched the entire interview but had “seen a couple of clips here and there.” Despite calls from some pro-Israel conservative activists and even two Republican members of Congress for the White House to condemn Carlson, who visited the White House on Monday, Vance described the interview as a positive development.
“I guess my takeaway is it’s a really good conversation that’s going to be necessary for the right, not just for the next couple years but for long into the future,” he said.
What he has always liked about the political right — “even the people that I find annoying on our side” — is that “there is a real exchange of ideas,” Vance said.
“And if you think of the Trump coalition in 2024 — and the way that I put it is, you had Joe Rogan, Mark Levin, Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, and JD Vance and a coalition of people … but to do that, you have to be willing to tolerate debate and disagreement,” he said. “And I just think that it’s a good thing.”