Vice President JD Vance privately accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of being “wrong on everything” about the Iran war, according to reports, as disagreements over the conflict expose tensions within the Trump administration and raise questions about Vance’s potential 2028 presidential ambitions.
The clash, reported by Axios Nov. 4., comes after Republicans lost control of both chambers of Congress in Tuesday’s midterm elections and Vance publicly blamed the war for the party’s defeat while urging President Donald Trump to pursue a negotiated settlement rather than renewed military strikes.
“The reason we lost is the war,” Vance wrote later on Wednesday on X.
VANCE’S SCATHING IRAN WAR POSTMORTEM PUTS POTENTIAL 2028 GOP SHOWDOWN IN FOCUS: ‘EVERYONE KNOWS WHY’
“Low-level hostility between Vance and Netanyahu is beneficial for Vance,” Natan Sachs, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, told Fox News Digital.
“It allows him to give some distance from the Trump administration, which has just taken a huge electoral beating, but also to position himself … in a very different position than President Trump himself without attacking Trump.”
Vance has also led a faction of senior administration officials urging Trump to negotiate an end to the conflict, warning that the unpopular war could cost Republicans control of Congress, according to reports.
Netanyahu had urged Trump to resume strikes against Iran ahead of the midterms, but Trump held off after endorsing Netanyahu for re-election in Israel.
Sachs said Vance’s main concern appeared to be the prospect of overthrowing Iran’s government after Netanyahu presented Trump with a plan for regime change.
“Many opposition leaders in Israel, nonetheless, are very skeptical of the idea that you can bring about regime change through an air campaign,” Sachs said, adding that such a campaign could have the opposite effect.
“You may strengthen the regime.”
As previously reported by Fox News Digital, Vance had also declined to endorse Netanyahu’s re-election campaign and criticized Israeli government officials who opposed Trump’s efforts to end the Iran war.
The Israeli election further complicated the relationship, Sachs said, leaving Netanyahu’s political future uncertain and raising the possibility that Vance could have to work with a different Israeli leader.
NETANYAHU DEFIES EXIT POLLS AS VOTE SHIFTS IN HIS FAVOR, BUT MAJORITY REMAINS ELUSIVE
“If Netanyahu is not the leader of Israel, Vance will find himself with another decision to make. Does he continue with a line that is confrontational with a new Israeli leadership, or does he say, ‘Well, it was all Netanyahu; now we can see a different path forward’?” Sachs said.
“Netanyahu is a very easy target here, both because there are very real differences of opinion, and Netanyahu’s role was important, but also because this way he can criticize the war, criticize Netanyahu, and not say any bad word about Trump.”
Roughly six in 10 voters said U.S. military action against Iran was the wrong decision, according to the AP Voter Poll.
“I think what’s remarkable here is that it’s coming out now,” Sachs said. “And it’s part of the fact that about midnight Wednesday, the next presidential campaign in the United States began, and JD Vance is trying to position himself.
“He is breaking with the policy of President Trump, although he’s doing so by criticizing Netanyahu, never Trump.”
VANCE REVEALS THE TRUMP DILEMMA THAT COULD COMPLICATE HIS 2028 WHITE HOUSE AMBITIONS
Nonetheless, Vance has played a leading role in efforts to end the conflict with Iran, including direct outreach to senior Iranian officials.
Last month, he sent a letter through Qatari intermediaries to Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, proposing renewed peace negotiations.
According to Axios, the letter said any negotiations to prevent further U.S. military strikes must address Iran’s nuclear program. A U.S. official said Trump backed the outreach. Rezaei later confirmed receiving the letter but said he had not responded.
“My suspicion is that JD Vance was operating on behalf of Trump on this,” Sachs claimed.
“Trump, after the war sort of settled after the first few weeks, appointed Vice President Vance to try and negotiate the exit strategy, and Vance has been very keen on that.”
Sachs also cited Vance’s involvement in an earlier memorandum of understanding with Iran as further evidence of his preference for diplomacy.
“He agreed to the MOU, which has become quite notorious in the United States, giving quite a bit to the Iranians, much more than the administration is now considering reasonable.
“Vance has certainly been on the side that has been trying to achieve a diplomatic breakthrough.”
The White House is now weighing whether to resume major strikes against Iran, maintain economic and naval pressure or pursue a negotiated settlement.
On Thursday, Reuters reported that Tehran submitted a formal nuclear proposal to the United States through Qatari intermediaries, making further negotiations contingent on Washington addressing its seven demands.
“The real question is whether the Americans and the Iranians can approach some kind of agreement on the fundamentals, starting with freedom of navigation in the Straits of Hormuz and the cessation of hostilities,” Sachs said.
For Vance, the dispute poses a political balancing act of distancing himself from a war he reportedly opposed while serving as vice president in the administration that launched it.
“He was against the war, so it would seem, but of course, he’s vice president in the administration that went to war,” Sachs said, describing it as a “very difficult balancing act for him electorally.”
