Conservative TV host Tucker Carlson said he intends to found a new political party, finally breaking with the Republican Party. According to The New York Times, the deciding factor was the war with Iran, which Carlson called a betrayal of the “America First” principles. He accused Donald Trump and Republican leadership of backing away from promises to protect the interests of ordinary Americans, and now believes the country needs a third path—outside the traditional rivalry between Republicans and Democrats.
Carlson emphasized that, in his view, the two major parties have no fundamental differences on key issues: war, funding, and foreign policy. He called the current system “a one-party state under the cover of democracy” and urged the dismantling of this duopoly. At the same time, as The Guardian reports, he ruled out his own bid for the presidency, saying he does not see himself as Trump’s competitor, but intends to support alternative candidates in Congressional elections in November.
Carlson’s announcement comes amid deep internal divisions within both parties. Democrats are under pressure from the left wing over their position on Israel and the war in Gaza, while Republicans are split between neoconservatives who support military intervention and isolationists who demand a focus on domestic problems. Carlson is clearly aligning himself with the second camp, proposing a full ban on immigration and a reworking of economic policy in light of the growth of artificial intelligence.
Alongside Carlson, a similar initiative is being promoted by former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene. According to The Independent, she is conducting “serious and intensive talks” with a number of political figures about creating a party oriented toward “pure” American interests, free from the “traps and frameworks” of the major parties. Greene called the current Republican bloc an expression of the agenda “America last,” and believes that a new force could attract both right-wing and left-wing voters who are disappointed with the establishment.
These moves reflect a broader ideological split within the conservative movement. As The Telegraph notes, on the one hand there are neoconservatives such as John Bolton, who demand the resumption of military operations to protect Israel; on the other are supporters of “America First,” who call the war with Iran “a betrayal” of the Trump base, provoked by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In experts’ view, this conflict is not simply about Trump’s personality—it touches the very identity of the conservative movement: whether it will be interventionist or isolationist, placing the economy, social issues, and immigration at the top of the agenda.
Thus, Carlson’s and Greene’s statements signal the possible emergence of a serious alternative to the two-party system. While for now it is only an idea and not an organizational structure, the very fact that a split in the conservative camp is being discussed publicly—and that a third force is being considered—points to growing dissatisfaction among a significant segment of American voters. Ahead of the next elections, this trend could significantly affect the balance of power, especially if the new movements manage to unite disaffected right-wing voters and part of the left electorate that opposes military adventurism and advocates for social justice.
Comments on the news
- What specific real events or conflicts between the US and Iran in recent years prompted calling the situation a “war with Iran”? — Among the sharpest incidents are the killing of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani in January 2020 on President Trump’s orders, after which Iran launched a missile strike on a U.S. base in Iraq, and a series of attacks on oil tankers and facilities in the Persian Gulf (2019). Cyberattacks should also be taken into account (for example, an attack on Iran’s nuclear program using Stuxnet, though it was classified) and intensive sanctions campaigns which, taken together, created the backdrop for “hybrid war.”
- Why in discussions among American conservatives is the war with Iran directly linked to Israel’s interests and to Prime Minister Netanyahu? — This is explained by the long-standing alliance between neoconservative circles in the US and Israeli leadership. Netanyahu has consistently portrayed Iran as an existential threat to Israel, and many American conservatives (especially in think tanks such as AEI and WINEP) view confrontation with Iran as part of protecting Israel’s security. Trump’s “maximum pressure” policy and withdrawal from the JCPOA matched what Netanyahu expected, which cemented the association “war with Iran = war for Israel” in the rhetoric of the right.
- How did the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) affect the split between neoconservatives and “America First” supporters within the Republican Party? — The JCPOA became a catalyst for the split. Neoconservatives (for example, John Bolton and Lindsey Graham) sharply criticized the deal as a “capitulation,” insisting on the use of force to contain Iran. “America First” supporters (including Trump himself and Tucker Carlson) opposed the JCPOA for different reasons: they believed the deal benefited European and Chinese allies more than the US, and they interpreted any foreign commitments as undermining national interests. In the end, both wings came together in rejecting the JCPOA, but from different ideological positions, which deepened the internal split in the party on foreign-policy issues.
Full version: يمين ترمب يتصدع.. هل تصنع حرب إيران حزبا أمريكيا ثالثا؟