United States President Donald Trump is taking a different approach to Iran in his second term. He has surrounded himself with a cabinet that is less aggressive toward Iran compared to the first term. However, experts are unsure if this change will affect how the administration responds to the ongoing conflict between Iran and Israel.
Recently, tensions escalated when Israel launched surprise attacks on Tehran, prompting Iran to retaliate. This exchange of strikes raises the risk of a larger regional conflict. Analysts are watching closely to see how Trump’s new team will react. Brian Finucane, a senior analyst at the International Crisis Group, noted that there are fewer traditional hawks in this administration, suggesting a shift toward more restraint-oriented voices.
So far, the Trump administration has taken a hands-off approach regarding Israel’s actions, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio emphasizing that the attacks were unilateral. While the U.S. has increased military assets in the region, it has avoided direct involvement. Trump has previously expressed a preference for diplomacy over military strikes, although he recently mentioned that U.S. involvement is possible due to the risks to American forces.
Iran’s foreign minister criticized Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, claiming that Trump could end the conflict with a simple phone call. Analysts believe that Trump’s decisions will reveal how he is balancing the differing views within his Republican base. One faction supports a more isolationist "America First" approach, while another favors a neoconservative stance that advocates for military intervention.
Among Trump’s advisors, there are voices for restraint. Vice President JD Vance has publicly called for caution regarding U.S. involvement in conflicts, including in Iran. During the campaign, he emphasized that U.S. and Israeli interests can sometimes differ, advocating for peace over war.
The current defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, while showing some support for military action, has echoed Trump’s preference for diplomatic solutions. This contrasts with the more hawkish figures from Trump’s first term, such as John Bolton and Mike Pompeo, who pushed for aggressive policies against Iran.
Experts note that Trump has a history of making decisions based on who he speaks to last. His reliance on outside voices, including media personalities and foreign leaders, often shapes his foreign policy. Recently, figures like Tucker Carlson have urged Trump to reconsider support for Israel’s military actions, while others, like Mark Levin, have called for a more aggressive stance.
Ultimately, the direction of U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict will depend on who can influence Trump the most in the coming days. As tensions continue to rise, all eyes are on the White House to see how this administration will respond to the unfolding situation.