One day after Vice President JD Vance Zelensky-ed Israel, an old quote from Henry Kissinger seems particularly apropos: “The word will go out to the nations of the world that it may be dangerous to be America’s enemy, but to be America’s friend is fatal.”
Because the PR turnaround was stunning: Just a news cycle before, President Donald Trump lavished praise on the Iranian leaders, describing them as “very rational people” who were “strong,” “smart,” “not radicalized,” and “nice to deal with,” who merely wanted to “help their country.” Hey, if Iran wants to arm itself with ballistic missiles, that’s now okay. What’s the fuss?
While the president was dangling PR carrots before the mullahs, the vice president was bashing the Israelis in the head with a PR stick:
JD Vance is not changing the conversation about Israel in the US. He is changing the entire paradigm:
— Trita Parsi (@tparsi) June 18, 2026
He is reminding the Israelis that they are alone and - though he doesn't use this word - much disliked internationally. Israel should not undermine the only strong friend they… pic.twitter.com/ZnqVTjve9R
JD Vance has warned Israel that the US is the only friend it has left and that it cannot “kill” its way out of problems.
— The Telegraph (@Telegraph) June 18, 2026
🔗: https://t.co/YqVROexnpp pic.twitter.com/OIl8IaPU6p
Let’s dissect the vice president’s argument:
- Vance said that some Israeli politicians in Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu’s cabinet had publicly criticized the U.S.-Iranian MOU. (True.)
- He said Israeli politicians had “very personally attacked the president of the United States.” (False: Their criticism was about the MOU itself.)
- Vance said that Israel buys most of its weapons from the U.S. (True — in part because America pressured Israel not to develop its own line of fighter jets (and continue buying American-made jets instead), and in part because Israel’s foreign aid package requires it to be spent on American-made weapons. In such a framework, buying weapons from China wouldn’t exactly make sense.)
- Vance said Israel doesn’t have any friends left in the world. (Mostly true, although some may quibble. But Israel is certainly isolated.)
- Vance said Israel “can’t just kill [its] way” out of “every single national security problem.” (False: That was an absurd strawman argument. The only one who said a “whole civilization will die” was Vance’s boss! The fact that Israel has defied the odds and is still standing strong seems to indicate its strategy is working — and besides, over the last 50 years, Israel has sacrificed more land for peace than any other Middle Eastern country, suggesting it’s open to tactics other than, y’know, global genocide.)
- Vance said, “Anybody in Israel who thinks their biggest problem is the president of the United States needs to wake up and smell the reality of the situation.” (False: Yes, President Donald Trump is the best friend Israel has ever had, and yes, he deserves the benefit of Israeli doubt. But Vance’s premise was insane: Absolutely NOBODY in Israel thinks Donald Trump is their biggest problem! They’re scared because IRAN is their biggest problem — a nation that funds terrorism and calls for Israel’s destruction — and it’s unclear if the MOU will keep them safe.)
On one hand, we can’t fault the vice president for fiercely defending the president’s agenda. (That’s literally his job.) And if he has to play fast and loose with his rhetoric, hey, welcome to Big League politics.
But Vance is also smart enough to understand how optics work. We’re in a political environment where Israel is being demonized by Iran, Europe, Western liberals, and Groyper isolationists as bloodthirsty, genocidal, greedy, two-faced, manipulative ingrates — and without question, Vance’s rhetoric piggybacked off those themes.
That was a deliberate choice.
As for why, it could be a few different things. The most charitable explanation is that Vance knew the Israelis were sensitive to that line of attack; therefore, it was the fastest way to shut ‘em up and get ‘em to fall in line.
So it wasn’t personal. It was just business.
Then again, it could also be because the vice president really, truly believes every word of it: In his worldview, the Israelis are the aggressors and warmongers, and it’s high time an American president put them in their place.
He meant what he said — just as he did when he blasted Volodymyr Zelensky for being ungrateful.
In his first 18 months as vice president, Vance has avoided choosing sides in GOP turf wars. At Turning Point USA, when Ben Shapiro called out Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, and Megyn Kelly for (among other things) antisemitism, Vice President Vance denounced “endless self-defeating purity tests,” hired Carlson’s son, and further defended Carlson, telling UnHerd:
The idea that Tucker Carlson, who has one of the largest podcasts in the world, who has millions of listeners, who supported Trump in the 2024 election, who supported me in the 2024 election, the idea that his views are somehow completely anathema to conservatism, that he has no place in the conservative movement, is frankly absurd. And I don’t think anybody actually believes it.
The upside of his strategy? If it works, Vance inherits an intact MAGA movement in 2028, instead of a faded facsimile. By staying neutral, he’s still capable of reuniting all wings of the right — the hawks, traditionalists, religious right, isolationists, and Groypers. When he runs for president, he needs to appeal to both Shapiro and Carlson, Mark Levin and Kelly, Joe Rogan and Elon Musk — just like Donald Trump did in 2024. Choosing sides could shrink his base.
But the downside to his strategy is that it exposes Vance to allegations that he’s secretly sympathetic to the Jew-haters, isolationists, and Israel’s worst enemies.
Which might not be true at all. Very possibly, “fake news” media outlets have created a false impression.
Case in point: Yesterday, Vance’s interview on The Diary of a CEO podcast dropped. Part of what Vance said caught my ear:
We wanted Iranian conventional military power to be much weaker, to be decimated. The Israelis shared that objective. Do I think there are maybe — I don’t know if Bibi thinks this — but do I think there are people within Israeli society who would like to turn Iran into Libya? Basically a failed state with 90 million people? Probably, but I don’t know that Bibi wants that. I’ve actually never had that conversation with him. It would be an interesting conversation to have. I’ll tell you right now, is Iran turning into a Persian Libya good for the United States of America? Absolutely not. [emphasis added]
That’s a jaw-dropper: Israel and America were war partners. We planned and strategized the Iran War together. We coordinated all the details of a VERY ambitious war plan.
So how come Vance never had a single conversation with Bibi Netanyahu about what a post-war Iran should look like?
Should Iran be a democracy? Run by a Shah? A theocracy? A failed state? Ruled by committees? Should we push for a popular uprising? Do we arm the Kurds? Partner with the militias? Bribe the mullahs? HELLO?!
If there was no discussion of what a post-war Iran should look like, how the heck could the vice president negotiate a peace agreement that addressed both American and Israeli interests? He was driving a car without knowing the destination.
By his own admission, he has no idea what Netanyahu wants!
And if there were zero discussions (or if Vance only cared about American interests), then why was the VP so surprised that the Israelis were caught flat-footed — or would try to protect their own national interests, too? Wouldn’t that be the most obvious outcome?
Either way, I suspect the earlier media reports that “Vance confronted Benjamin Netanyahu in a tense phone call, accusing the Israeli leader of being overly optimistic about the chances of regime change” were fake news: If they never discussed what a post-war Iran should look like, when would the topic of regime change be raised?
And if that report was wrong, what else was misreported?
Is it possible that the overwhelming majority of news stories about Vance’s so-called hatred of Israel were placed by anti-Israel members of the media — a murderers’ row of journalists that includes liberals, leftists, socialists, Muslim apologists, Iranian propagandists, isolationists, the Woke Right, and Groypers? (In other words, 95% of the media.)
Maybe. The truth might be that the vice president is negotiating a peace deal under the president's direct supervision, but his one-on-one contact with Netanyahu was overblown, overhyped, and overstated. He doesn’t know what Netanyahu wants because he wasn’t allowed to speak to him one-on-one. For better or worse, the Iran War was the Donald Trump Show. (And so is the MOU.)
Therefore, we shouldn't overanalyze Vance’s words: He’s not opposed to Israel per se — he’s opposed to Israel talking badly about his boss’ peace deal, because that’s what a loyal vice president is supposed to do.
As an America First conservative, his top priority (and key to his 2028 ambitions) is consolidating the MAGA movement. Well, much of the MOU’s pushback came from our movement’s traditionalists and hawks — Ben Shapiro, Ted Cruz, Mark Levin. You’ll notice that Vance didn’t attack ANY of them: He attacked a foreign government instead.
Just as he avoided attacking the right's isolationists, he avoided attacking the right’s hawks.
Today, 57% of Republicans under 50 have a negative opinion of Israel. For those 50+, it’s just 24%. There’s an age divide on this issue.
And Vance, of course, is 41.
Related: JD Vance Just Wrote a New Book. Will Marco Rubio Steal the Ending?
My suspicion is that Vance isn’t waging a Holy War against Israel — nor is he a stooge of Carlson — but he’s also a product of his generation: Israel is one of over 200 countries, America’s relationship with Israel has plusses and minuses, and it’s our responsibility to measure the scales accordingly. He sees everything through a transactional, America First prism: He appreciated Israeli assistance when it was our ally in war — Mossad’s intelligence was very helpful — but this was always going to be a marriage of convenience because everything always is.
Shame on you for thinking otherwise!
We did you Israelis a big solid by pounding Iran, so don’t screw us over on the way out.
Whether or not there’s nobility to that sentiment — or if American morality should stand for more than transactional benefits — is entirely up to you. (As well as the future cost of treating a wartime ally poorly: Eventually, we’ll need allies again, and Kissinger’s words will surely be remembered.)
Ronald Reagan spoke of America as a “shining city upon a hill.” That city, I imagine, stood for more than its own self-interest.
Am I the only one who misses that city?
One Last Thing: 2026 is a critical year for America First. It began with Mayor Mamdani declaring war on “rugged individualism” and will reach a crescendo with the midterm elections. Nothing less than the fate of the America First movement teeters in the balance.
Never before have the political battle lines been so clearly defined. Win or lose, 2026 will transform our country.
We need your help to succeed!
As a PJ Media VIP member, you’ll receive exclusive access to our behind-the-paywall content, commenting privileges, and an ad-free experience. VIP Gold gets you the same level of “insider access” across our entire family of sites (PJ Media, Townhall, RedState, twitchy, Hot Air, and Bearing Arms). That means: More stories, more videos, more content, more fun, more conservatism, more EVERYTHING!
And if you CLICK HERE and use the promo code FIGHT you’ll receive a Trumpian 60% discount!
Thank you for your consideration.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member