Alex
Shephard
/
March 4,
2026
https://newrepublic.com/article/207311/trump-iran-war-maga-republican-crack-up-just-beginning
The
Republican Meltdown Over Iran Is Just Beginning
Right-wing
criticism of Trump’s war has mostly come from familiar MAGA cranks like Steve
Bannon and Tucker Carlson. But it could quickly spiral out of control.
On
Monday, two days after the United States and Israel launched their war on Iran,
Megyn Kelly began her SiriusXM show by saying she was praying for American
troops, as well as mourning the U.S. service members who already had been
killed by retaliatory strikes. But she quickly shifted gears, questioning why
soldiers have to “put their lives on the line … for whom, again?”
“My own
feeling is no one should have to die for a foreign country. I don’t think those
four service members died for the United States,” she said. “I think they died
for Iran or for Israel.… Our government’s job is not to look out for Iran or
for Israel. It’s to look out for us.”
Kelly is
far from alone. Tucker Carlson on Saturday called the war “absolutely
disgusting and evil,” and in a lengthy video on Monday said, “It’s hard to say
this, but the United States didn’t make the decision here. [Israeli Prime
Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu did.” (Well, it’s not that hard to say that.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Speaker of the House Mike Johnson have said
something similar, albeit as justification for President Trump’s decision.) In
more extreme corners, the white supremacist and antisemitic influencer Nick
Fuentes urged his followers not to vote in the midterms over the war—or
otherwise vote for Democrats. Steve Bannon, Trump’s svengali during his 2016
campaign and now a top MAGA podcaster, referred to the war as a “betrayal.”
It’s
tempting to call this a MAGA civil war, though that’s not quite right. Even
though a huge majority of the country as a whole opposes the war with Iran, a
CNN poll found 77 percent of Republicans support it—and there is little sign
yet of Trump losing the support of congressional Republicans, in particular.
Still, it is a crack-up and a serious one, especially given the GOP’s dire
outlook for the midterm elections. It points to Trump’s diminishing grip on his
own movement. “MAGA is Trump,” the president said when asked about Kelly’s and
Carlson’s criticism. He’s not wrong, really—he still commands enormous
influence over his movement and party. But we are seeing his hold over it truly
slip for the first time since his emergence as a political force a decade ago.
Kelly,
Carlson, and Bannon have all criticized Trump before, and they’ve all gotten
back in line later. But less than a week in, this war already threatens to drag
on for weeks—if not months, or, as Trump floated on Monday, “forever.” If it
does drag on, it will become even less popular, including among Republicans.
Facing sustained criticism from the MAGA faithful who rightly see the war as a
“betrayal,” Trump could well spiral into unprecedented territory.
There are
historical reasons for believing that Trump will survive this MAGA split
largely unscathed. In 2016, much of the intellectual conservative establishment
opposed his candidacy and failed miserably in its attempt to stop him. In
January of that year, National Review published an entire issue, featuring
essays from dozens of conservative figures, some whose criticism of Trump has
grown more pointed (notably William Kristol) and many more who have since
warmed up to the president, if not become outright admirers (like Ben Domenech
and Erick Erickson). It didn’t work—and National Review slowly shifted from
Never Trumpism to anti-anti-Trumpism to generally pro-Trumpism, even as he does
many of the things they warned about back in 2016.
So yes,
Trump has beat back the conservative intelligentsia before. But that’s not
really what he’s facing right now. One way Trump was able to defeat the
eggheads at National Review was by empowering other figures who embraced him.
In many cases, these people backfilled the intellectual void in the MAGA
movement. Trump was anti-immigration, anti–free trade, and loosely
anti-interventionist; people like Bannon and Carlson took those loose
parameters and fleshed them out.
Of
course, most of the MAGA movement is still whatever Trump says it is. MAGA is
Trump—not Carlson or Bannon and certainly not Megyn Kelly or lower-level
critics of the Iran war like Matt Walsh, a loudmouth who makes Kelly look like
Jürgen Habermas. But Trump’s resilience stems in part from his ability to craft
alliances with disparate—and often contradictory—parts of the Republican
coalition. His incoherence and stunning lack of command over policy basics made
him attractive to both neoconservatives and isolationists. His seeming
preference for extremely aggressive but limited military operations abroad—like
the assassination of Iranian Quds Force leader Qasem Soleimani in 2020 or the
kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in January, could ostensibly
satisfy people in every camp. These were bold, illegal, dangerous moves. But
they weren’t accompanied by calls for regime change or the extended deployment
of U.S. troops.
Now Trump
has planted a flag firmly in the interventionist camp. This has been a long
evolution, one that began with the dropping of the “Mother of All Bombs” in
Afghanistan in 2017 and has now peaked with the killing of Supreme Leader Ali
Khamenei in the initial strikes on Saturday. We’re now witnessing what may be
the beginning of a regional war. Whether U.S. troops will be deployed on the
ground is anyone’s guess, but this war will hang over Trump’s presidency
regardless.
Trump and
Netanyahu have made a mess of the entire Middle East in only a few days—Iran is
bombing Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and several other Gulf States. The U.S.
has instructed hundreds of thousands of civilians to leave the region, even
though it has left them to fend for themselves as Iranian bombs fall on
airports. It’s still not clear who will emerge to lead Iran in the wake of
Khamenei’s death, nor what type of leader or government would be deemed
acceptable to Israel or the United States. As I wrote over the weekend, it
seems clear that the two countries prefer vastly different outcomes, with
American leaders wanting relative stability—perhaps with a full takeover from
the Revolutionary Guard Corps—and Israeli leaders seeking to turn Iran into a
failed state. And the CIA’s reported decision on Tuesday to begin arming
Iranian Kurds seems designed to jump-start a civil war.
Trump,
it’s worth saying, is doing all of this while he is historically unpopular and
his party is facing what may turn out to be the biggest midterm massacre since
2006. But what happens when he is even more unpopular, overseeing a foreign war
that’s out of control, and no longer has control of Congress? What happens when
the subpoenas and investigations—and yes, impeachments—start? What happens if
this becomes a regional war? What happens if U.S. civilians, stranded in a Gulf
state, are taken hostage? What happens if U.S. ground forces start aiding one,
or several, factions in an Iranian civil war?
These are
all plausible scenarios, given the state of play in this very moment:
Republicans in Congress are holding onto control by a thread, Trump’s approval
rating is plummeting to new depths, and this war is already spinning out of
control. The administration has no plan for what comes next; hell, it doesn’t
even have a plan for evacuating the hundreds of thousands of U.S. civilians who
are stuck in the Middle East. But Trump is also unprepared politically—for the
exodus of support from Republican voters and lawmakers alike if this war
expands and ground troops are deployed. He says, “MAGA is Trump.” Before too
long, that may be pretty much all that MAGA is.
Alex
Shephard
Alex
Shephard is senior editor of The New Republic, where he has covered politics
and culture since 2015. His work has also appeared in New York, GQ, The
Atlantic, The Nation, and other publications.

Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário