Opinion - Trump must take on his own administration's isolationist wing
President Trump has been harsh on the Middle East policies of former Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden. He has good reasons for that. The Obama-Biden era saw the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood and political Islam, the empowerment of Iran, the creation of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria and the deadly Oct. 7 terrorist attack in Israel and ensuing war in Gaza.
In contrast, Trump's first term had brought stability to the region. Trump led efforts to destroy the Islamic State, repaired fractured relations with the Gulf States and Israel and restored deterrence to the region through shows of force.
Now, in Trump's second term, he should make sure he doesn't make the same mistakes as his predecessors, which could embolden Iran and political Islamist movements. Specifically, the president should avoid public conflicts with the government of Israel, take a strong stance against Iran and restore the deterrence that the Biden administration eroded.
To do this, he must take on the isolationist wing of his own administration.
Officials including Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Middle East Michael DiMino and other isolationist adherents have strongly pushed against any sort of U.S. intervention in the region. But avoiding intervention at all costs is perceived in the Middle East as weakness.
Trump's rhetoric signals he understands the true meaning of peace through strength, yet some of his actions have signaled something else. Washington halted strikes against the Houthi rebels in Yemen, for instance, after the Houthis promised not to strike U.S. ships. Trump and his secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, have also failed to hold Iran accountable for Houthi actions; even during Trump's recent visit to Saudi Arabia, the Houthis launched rockets at Israel over Saudi airspace.
Administration officials told the New York Times that the operation was costly and the United States was unable to establish air superiority. Such claims seem strange, considering the United States spends more than the next nine countries combined on its military.
Trump also avoided a stopover in Israel during his recent Middle East tour, inspiring reports of a widening gulf between Washington and Jerusalem. This is dangerous, as Israel plays a key part in establishing regional deterrence. While the U.S. prematurely aborted its attacks against the Houthis, Israel has decimated Hezbollah — Iran's greatest deterrent — destroyed Iranian air defenses and carried out targeted assassinations against top Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps officials. Washington still urgently needs Israel as an enforcer.
The danger of such policy is that regional adversaries like Iran stop taking U.S. statements seriously.
Take, for example, how Iran has scoffed at the Trump administration's avowed red line in negotiations: zero tolerance for nuclear enrichment. Over the past weeks, Iranian authorities have signaled their defiance. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei called the U.S. demands 'nonsensical, ' Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Tehran was considering whether to participate in talks, and Iranian members of parliament issued a statement saying Iran would 'never back down on our nuclear rights' followed by chanting 'death to America' and 'death to Israel.' Iranian state media called the administration's most recent proposal 'far from reality.'
Such impudence may seem strange for a country whose economy is in shambles, whose proxy network has been smashed and whose air defenses have been obliterated. Yet as Iran watches the administration's policy divisions and leaks, its leaders believe they can spot weakness, and have shown they are willing to gamble on its nuclear enrichment program. For Iran, the stakes are high; the ayatollahs do not want to share the fates of deposed Arab dictators Saddam Hussein or Muammar Gaddafi, and nuclear proliferation is their guarantee of existence.
Trump's modus operandi is using economic incentives and punishments to shape policy. While such policy may work with the Gulf nations, whose prime concern is building a wealthy and stable society, history has shown that the ideologically driven actors of the region, including Iran, only respond to credible threats.
Trump proved this concept himself when he ordered the assassination of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Quds Force chief Qassem Soleimani. What followed was a drop in Iranian proxy activity and what then CENTCOM commander Kenneth McKenzie Jr. referred to as 'reestablished … deterrence.'
But while Trump understands this concept, many of the isolationists in his Cabinet do not. Gabbard argued that even building up U.S. weaponry in the region could 'spark a wider conflict with Iran.' Such logic is exactly what led the Obama and Biden administrations before, and what caused the current chaos in the region: de-escalation at all costs.
But such policy doesn't lead to peace.
Peace has historically been achieved through the unipolar dominance of a single power, as seen during the Pax Romana, Pax Mongolica and Pax Britannica. These eras of stability endured as long as that dominant influence remained strong, and they unraveled when it began to decline. In the case of Iran, the assassination of Soleimani proved the opposite: decisive action leads to submission while de-escalation leads to further aggression. In the meantime, the White House asked agencies to pause new sanctions against Iran — a move that will only further embolden the Islamic Republic.
As Trump likes to bring up, Biden proved this concept through the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan. Kremlin officials later confirmed that the resulting perceived U.S. weakness inspired Russian President Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine.
While many of Trump's isolationist advisers believe that the U.S., despite having the strongest military and economy in the world by far, is incapable of 'policing the world,' they do not consider that Washington is not alone. A U.S.-led world order is much more appealing to most of the world than what China might offer. In the case of the Middle East, Israel would carry out the bulk of any operation against Iran. The key to U.S. hegemony without being overstretched is relying on and supporting alliances.
If Trump wants to be the president of peace, he should take lessons from his own first term. If he listens to the voices denouncing 'forever wars,' he may end up repeating the mistakes of his predecessors.
Joseph Epstein is director of the Turan Research Center, a nonpartisan research program at the Yorktown Institute focused on the Turkic and Persian worlds.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Bloomberg
31 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Trump's Administration Has Asked Ally Serbia to Accept Deportees
President Donald Trump's administration is pushing Serbia and other Balkan nations to take in migrants deported from the US, according to people familiar with the matter. The requests to countries in the region are ongoing and part of a broader strategy to find foreign governments willing to receive migrants sent from the US, including some who originally entered under Biden-era protections, according to the people, who requested anonymity because the talks were private.
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ex-Trump Aide Spells Out How Elon Musk Could Gain Ultimate Revenge On The President
Former White House communications director Alyssa Farah Griffin explained Wednesday why she believes tech billionaire Elon Musk could now actually 'tank Donald Trump's entire legislative agenda.' Griffin, a co-host on ABC's 'The View,' warned that Musk's vocal opposition to Trump's so-called 'big, beautiful' spending bill could sway Republicans in Congress, especially those worried about the consequences to their seats if they cross the world's richest person. Musk recently slammed the bill as a 'disgusting abomination' for how it will hike the national debt. He had previously staked his reputation on slashing federal spending in his now-ended role running Trump's unofficial Department of Government Efficiency. Trump, for now, has remained silent on Musk's criticism. Griffin, who served in the Trump administration during his first term, noted how the bill has measures on energy, border security and extends Trump's tax cuts. 'If Republicans decide, 'Oooh, we don't want to get on the wrong side of Elon,' that is what Donald Trump is banking it all on,' she continued. 'And that is kind of devastating for his administration.' 'On the flip side, those Republicans, if you're in a House district, you're like, 'I'm afraid of Donald Trump,' but Elon Musk, because of the dark money system we live in, he can come in and primary you by just pouring millions and millions into your race.' All Musk needs to do, she suggested, is 'peel off a handful of Republicans' to tip the balance of power in the House. Watch here: Critics Cackle Over Mike Johnson's Awkward Confession About Elon Musk Phone Call 'You Wussed Out': David Mamet Reveals Trump's 20-Minute Call After He Committed A MAGA Sin Critics Gasp At Trump Official's 'The Thing That Matters' Declaration
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump has demolished the liberal myth. Migrants shouldn't be treated equally
Sometimes the best policies are the ones that produce the shrillest wails from the Left. Such may be the case with Trump's latest travel ban, which by rights should spark serious soul-searching in Britain. Overnight, the President announced restrictions on the citizens of 12 countries. This was a response to the recent terror attack on Boulder, Colorado, in which an Egyptian national, Mohamed Sabry Soliman, is alleged to have thrown firebombs and sprayed burning petrol at a Jewish vigil on Sunday in support of Israeli hostages held by Hamas. Although Egypt is not on the list, Homeland Security officials said Mr Soliman was in the country illegally, having overstayed a tourist visa, but that he had applied for asylum in September 2022. So far, so Trumpian. (He took similar measures during his first term, after all, and they were repealed by Joe Biden who called them 'a stain on our national conscience'.) But then came the kicker. 'We will not let what happened in Europe happen in America,' Trump said. Ouch. If the months of Trump 2.0 have so far shifted the Overton window across the West, allowing even the likes of Sir Keir Starmer to contemplate – at least rhetorically – tackling immigration, then such a travel ban should be welcomed on these shores as well. Already, the usual suspects are accusing Trump of being 'racist'. But a glance at the range of countries on the list shows that this is not a question of race, or even religion. Rather, it is a question of homeland security, and that holds a stark lesson for Britain. A few months back, official data revealed that though foreigners comprise just 15 per cent of the population of our country, they commit 41 per cent of all crime and up to a quarter of sex crimes. In the first nine months of 2024, almost 14 per cent of grooming suspects were Pakistani, five times their share of the population. Two nationalities – Afghans and Eritreans – were more than 20 times more likely to account for sexual offence convictions than British citizens, according to the data. Overall, foreign nationals were 71 per cent more likely than Britons to be responsible for sex crime convictions. Based on convictions per 10,000 of the population, Afghans with 77 convictions topped the table with a rate of 59 per 10,000, 22.3 times that of Britons. They were followed by Eritreans, who accounted for 59 convictions at a rate of 53.6 per 10,000 of their population. In March 2025, data from the Ministry of Justice revealed that foreigners, who claim £1 billion a month in benefits, were also responsible for large proportions of violence, robbery, fraud and drug offences, between 2021 and 2023. There was no data for terrorism offences or acts of anti-Semitism. But does anybody want to hazard a guess? Which brings us to a fundamental question. Why? Why does Britain need to allow the criminals of the world to come to our shores to abuse women and girls, run criminal enterprises, foster terrorism and anti-Semitism, and claim benefits in the process? Obviously not all foreigners from these countries behave in this way. But facts aren't racist. Large numbers are pulling down our pants, spanking our buttocks and pulling them up again. In fact, the problem is not one of race but one of politics and culture. In my new book, Never Again? How the West Betrayed the Jews and Itself, which is coming out at the end of September, I look at groundbreaking research published in April by cognitive scientists Scott Barry Kaufman and Craig Neumann. They found that 'citizens in democratic countries have more benevolent traits, fewer malevolent traits, and greater well-being' than those living under autocratic regimes. Based on a study of 200,000 people from 75 countries, people living under autocracies were found to be much more likely to exhibit the 'Dark Triad' of negative personality traits: narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy. In democracies, by contrast, more people displayed the 'Light Triad' of humanism, faith in humanity and 'Kantianism', or treating people with dignity in their own right rather than viewing them as a means to an end. Obviously, this is not related to race. Russians are hardly black, but they hardly live in a democracy either. It is a case of cognitive development. The problem occurs when, in an age of global travel, 'Dark Triad' migrants who grew up in despotic regimes encounter gullible 'Light Triad' officials in the democracies, whose empathies are easily played upon. That is why we find British judges ruling that an Albanian convict should avoid deportation because his son had an aversion to foreign chicken nuggets, a Pakistani drug dealer could stay so he could teach his son about Islam, and a paedophile of the same nationality should not be sent home since it would be 'unduly harsh' on his own children. These real-life cases, reported by the Telegraph, provide a clear collision of the 'Dark Triad' traits in the criminals and the 'Light Triad' tendencies in the judges. It is a chemical reaction waiting to happen, and the vast majority of the population, wherever they are born, are suffering the consequences. In other words, we are being taken for fools. No foreign criminal has a God-given right to set up home in Britain just because he fancies it. This is our home, and although we are delighted to welcome strangers, that generosity should be withdrawn from those who nick our television and threaten our children – even if their own happen to like the chicken nuggets in our fridge. Trump has now thrown down the gauntlet. What is the British Government going to do to set our own house in order? Will it take an anti-Semitic outrage like the firebombing in Colorado before the Prime Minister takes action? Will he take action even then? Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.