The Cabinet Trump is less sincere. Will this affect Israel’s response to Iran? | Israel Iran

Washington, DC, US President Donald Trump himself has surrounded the cabinet and the internal circle, which is significantly less honest to Iran, compared to his first term.

But analysts told Al -Jazeera that it is still unclear whether Trump’s new cabinet formation will make a difference when it comes to how the administration responds to Edge conflict Between Iran and Israel.

Last week, fighting erupted when Israel fired sudden strikes on Tehran, which led Iran to revenge. He threatened to exchange missiles and explosions by reaching a broader regional war.

“I think there are fewer hawks in the traditional republican hawks in this administration,” said Brian Venocan, the chief analyst of the International Crisis Group, a research center. “You have more prominent people with restrictions or street people.”

“The question is: How high are they?”

So far, the Trump administration has pursued a relative manual approach to Israel’s attacks, which Foreign Minister Marco Rubio confirmed that it was “unilaterally.”

While the United States has increased military assets to the region, it has avoided participating directly in the confrontation. Trump has publicly opposed an Israeli strike on Iran in the weeks before the attacks, saying he preferred diplomacy.

However, on Sunday, Trump told ABC News, “We can get involved,” noting the risks of American forces in the region.

He even frame the Israeli bombing campaign as the origin of the ongoing talks to reduce the Iranian nuclear program, although many negotiators who were killed on the basis of Israeli strikes.

The Iranian Foreign Minister, Meanwhile, accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of “playing” Trump and US taxpayers for “fools”, saying that the American president can end the fighting with a “single phone call” by the Israeli leader.

“Our interest in not war with Iran is very warm”

Analysts agree that any Trump’s work path is likely to turn the conflict. It will also reveal how Trump responds to the depth Ideological rift Inside his Republican base.

One aspect of that gap is adopting Trump’s ideology, “America First”: the idea that the local interests of the United States come in front of others. This perspective largely avoids foreign intervention.

The other side of the Trump base supports the neo -conservative approach to foreign policy: the most passionate side by following military intervention, and sometimes with the aim of forcing the regime on the outside.

Both views are represented between the closest Trump advisors. Vice President JD VanceFor example, an example of Trump official who called for restraint, whether in terms of Iranian support or the United States for Israel.

In March, Vans objected to strikes against the Yemeni Houthis, as shown in Leaks messages From private chat with other officials in the application signal. In that conversation, Vans argued that the bombing campaign was “wrong” and “inconsistent” with Trump’s message of universal association.

During the 2024 presidential campaign, Vans also warned that the interests of the United States and Israel are “sometimes distinct … and our interest is a lot in not war with Iran.”

According to experts, it is rare for this type of statement to hear a senior official in the Republican Party, as Israel’s support remains largely. Venocan, for example, is called “very noticeable” Vans.

He added: “I think his office may be decisive to pressure for restraint.”

Other Trump officials have similarly built professions on handrails against foreign intervention, including the Director of National Intelligence Tolsi GabbardIn March, they witnessed that the United States “continues to evaluate that Iran does not build a nuclear weapon.”

Trump’s private envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkeov, who had almost no previous diplomatic experience, has also proposed the possibility of normalizing relations with Tehran in the early days of the US -led nuclear talks.

In contrast, the Foreign Minister and National Security Adviser, Acting Marco Rubio himself as a new traditional portfolio, with a “difficult on Iran” position, during his period of work for years in the Senate. But since joining the Trump administration, Rubio has not broke his ranks with the “first American” foreign policy platform for the president.

This loyalty indicates a broader tendency between the Trump inner circle during his second term, according to Brian Catolis, an older colleague at the Middle East Institute.

“I think Trump 2.0 has a cabinet of the chameleon, whose primary qualification is loyalty and inflammation of Trump more than anything else,” he told the meeting.

Katolis indicated that the days of officials who stood with Trump, such as former Defense Secretary James Mattis, were mostly – the remains of Trump State, from 2017 to 2021.

The current defense minister, the former Fox News host Beit Higseth, showed an appetite for air strikes on groups compatible with Iran, including the Houthis in Yemen.

But Higseth told Fox News on Saturday that the president continues to send the message “that he prefers peace, as he prefers a solution to this to be solved on the table.”

“More honest than Maga War Control”

Finally, Trump continues to work in the administration “may be more honest than Maga to fight war,” according to Ryan Costilo, director of politics in the American -Iranian National Council, a group of lobby.

At least one official, an American ambassador to Israel, Mike Hakapi, to the equality of Iran’s revenge against Israel by targeting American interests, with a highlight of the large number of American citizens living in Israel.

Costello admits that Trump’s first period similarly had its fair share of foreign policy hawks. At that time, former National Security Adviser John Bolton, his replacement of Robert O’Brien and former Foreign Minister Mike Pompeo called for military strategies to deal with Tehran.

“But there is a big difference between Trump’s first term, when he raised great friendships on Iran and Trump’s second period,” said Costilo.

He believes that this time, doubts extend our involvement in the Middle East in the ranks of management.

Costilo pointed to a recent conflict between the head of the Central Central Command, General Michael Corella, and the adaptation of the Ministry of Policy Defense. The Semafor news port reported on Sunday that Kurilla was pressuring the transformation of more military assets to the Middle East to defend Israel, but Kulby opposed this step.

Costilo says that the defection is part of a greater transformation in the Trump administration and in the Republican Party as a whole.

“You have many prominent voices that raise the issue that these favorite wars followed by the neo -conservatives escaped from the republican administrations and preventing them from focusing on really important issues,” said Costilo.

Venocan also noticed the axis of Trump’s first -to -second term. In 2019, during the first four years as his president, Venocan said that Trump’s national security team had made a “unanimous recommendation” to hit Iran after targeting an American drone.

Trump is ultimately the plan in the last hours, according to multiple reports.

But after a year, the Trump administration was assassinated by the Iranian general Djibouti and Somali In a plane strike in Iraq, another example brought the United States to the edge of the war.

Who will listen to Trump?

Certainly experts say Trump has a notorious mercury approach to politics. Other observers, the last person to speak to the president, said most likely to practice the greatest influence.

Trump is also regularly looking for guidelines from outside the White House when she faced subordination decisions, consulting major media such as Fox News, separate right -wing actors, social media figures, and senior donors.

This was the case before the United States strike for 2019 on Iran, with the news host at the time Taker Karlson among those who urge Trump to retract the attack.

Since then, Carlson has been a major voice calling on Trump to drop support for the “thirsty government” in Netanyahu, and urged the president to allow Israeli officials to “fight their wars.”

But Carlson is not the only number of conservative media with the influence of Trump. The conservative media host, Mark Levin, called for military measures against Iran, saying in recent days that Israel’s attacks should be the beginning of a campaign to overthrow the Iranian government.

Politico reported that Levin visited the White House for a special lunch with Trump in early June, a few days before the US President presented his support for Iran’s strikes.

But Katolis at the Middle East Institute predicted that there are no Trump or media outlets like Levin that will prove that she is the most dependent in directing the president’s options. Instead, Trump’s decision is likely to move on whether any global leader who gets his ear will move, and when.

“It is the favorite Washington Salon game to demonstrate, such as the cabinet members and employees more than they do,” Katolis told Al -Jazeera.

He said: “But I think, in the second Trump administration, is less than his team officially and more than he spoke to him recently – whether Netanyahu is in Israel or another leader in the region.”

“I think this will be more than the decisive factor while the United States decides to do after that.”