The News
Donald Trump is putting his foreign policy instincts to the ultimate test in the Middle East — even as he, and his party, are still working to define something like a Trump Doctrine.
The White House describes Trump’s identity on the global stage with a callback to Ronald Reagan that’s a cornerstone of GOP ideology: “Peace through strength.” Yet reality is proving more complicated than that simple phrase this week, as the party’s non-interventionists cheer Trump’s post-bombing pivot to diplomacy and its hawks assess whether he’s gone far enough for them.
“A ceasefire that leads to a sustainable peace, where Iran changes its policy of trying to destroy the State of Israel and would actually recognize the State of Israel, would be a great outcome,” Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told Semafor. “A ceasefire that doesn’t lead to that and more, probably is a step backwards, because it gives them time to rearm and replenish.”
Trump could have allowed Israel to prosecute its war without directly striking — or he could have tried to incite a regime change in Iran. Instead he chose a middle ground that’s still scrambling alliances within his party; Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene argued Monday that Trump’s bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities is “a complete bait-and-switch to please the neocons” and ultra-hawkish pundit Mark Levin aired skepticism about a ceasefire.
If anything is clear to many Republicans, it’s that Trump’s global doctrine has no firm definition beyond his own best sense of protecting US interests. Despite plenty of internal cries that he’d become a neoconservative, few people who’ve worked with him agree.
“The jury is still out” on Trump’s foreign policy, David Schenker, who served as assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern Affairs during his first term, said in an interview. But, Schenker added: “The president is not a neocon.”
Marc Short, chief of staff to Vice President Mike Pence during Trump’s first term, described Trump as “more of a realist” who has, when it comes to Iran, “been consistent.” After all, Trump ripped up former President Barack Obama’s deal to contain Tehran’s nuclear program and returned to sanctions, making clear he saw little room for compromise.
Reagan’s “peace through strength,” as far as the Soviet Union was concerned, included groundbreaking denuclearization agreements, furiously criticized by the right at the time.
One person close to Trump told Semafor that his foreign policy approach is driven by those “who got burned by Reaganism,” arguing that some of his allies don’t grasp the nuance.
“When your foreign policy is called America First, you’re bound to find among you, ‘America only’ types. And Donald Trump has never been ‘America only,’ ever,” this person said. “The idea that he would never stand for Iran having nuclear weapons has never changed. And the ‘America only’ types who are just now discovering it? Welcome to the party.”
White House spokeswoman Liz Huston said that “President Trump’s proven ‘peace through strength’ approach is keeping Americans safe, deterring hostile threats around the world, and restoring stability to regions plagued by chaos.”
The few non-interventionist Republicans who have not broadly supported Trump’s moves this week seem to be adjusting to the new reality — even as the president keeps attacking Rep. Thomas Massie, the Kentucky congressman who will withdraw his push for a war powers vote if the ceasefire holds.
Another in that group, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, said Monday that “all the neocons that have wanted us to be involved in every war in the Middle East are jumping up and down beside themselves” after Trump’s strikes — but Tuesday, he was wishing Trump luck with diplomacy.
Some Republicans “don’t have a sufficient degree of restraint in regard to war. And my hope is that the ceasefire will last,” Paul said. “And that the president’s natural instinct not to send troops into the Middle East will prevail.”
Know More
Other, more Reaganite Republicans were taken aback by the frustrations with Israel that Trump expressed to cameras on Tuesday morning.
Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., told Semafor he wasn’t “sure why he was more critical of Israel.” He advised Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to be prepared to go back into Iran if the intelligence shows its nuclear program is still humming.
“If they’re not destroyed, between us and Israel, you can’t allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. It’s the number one most [likely reason] for nuclear war,” Bacon said.
That’s the toughest possibility for Trump to consider as he and Vice President JD Vance insist it’s not a war on Iran but on its nuclear program: What if that program is easy to rebuild?
What’s more, the president now must put his peacemaker moniker in the hands of other countries — not just Iran and Israel. There’s also the Ukraine-Russia war, something Trump made clear on the trail that he wants to solve and that continues to vex his administration.
“What’s going to happen is that Donald Trump’s success in creating peace in Russia-Ukraine depends in large part on his success in the Middle East right now,” the person close to Trump told Semafor. “What Donald Trump has created is a domino effect.”
And if he’s not successful, this person added, he “has always got the option of walking away.”
Room for Disagreement
Vance built his own national name on a more non-interventionist stance and offered what amounted to his own definition of the Trump doctrine on Tuesday.
“1) clearly define an American interest; 2) negotiate aggressively to achieve that interest; 3) use overwhelming force if necessary,” the vice president posted on X.
And one former Trump administration national security official discounted the idea that Trump’s Iran strikes amount to any major shift in his approach: “Iran is very personal for him, because they directly threatened him and his family.”
Schenker, another former Trump adviser, even likened his decision to strike Iranian nuclear sites to his first-term strike on Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani.
Shelby, Burgess, and Morgan’s View
The post-Trump Republican Party will have to sort out how it can neatly define a foreign policy doctrine that doesn’t quite fit into one box — and is often based around support for him rather than a specific policy toolbox. How can his successor carry on that same legacy?
You see Vance embracing Trump’s brand as necessary. But there’s no telling whether Trump will shift again, whether in the Middle East or Europe, and there’s no guarantee that Vance can keep the whole party with him the way Trump has.
For now, this is what matters most: There appears to be little limit to how far most Republicans will follow him — into Iran, or elsewhere.
Notable
Democrats are sharpening their attacks against Trump’s foreign policy after the US bombed Iranian nuclear facilities, NBC News reported.
Congress’s Iran briefings are postponed from Tuesday to Thursday to allow Secretaries Marco Rubio and Pete Hegseth to attend.
A preliminary US intelligence assessment determined that Trump’s strikes likely set back Iranian nuclear capability by only months, CNN reported.