Radio and Fox News host Mark Levin confronted former Director of the National Counterterrorism Center Joe Kent on-air Monday night over Kents claim that Israel pushed the United States into war with Iran.
The tense exchange unfolded during an appearance by Kent, who resigned from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence after accusing Israel of running a misinformation campaign that he says helped persuade President Donald Trump to strike Iran, as reported by WND. Kent has argued that U.S. involvement in the conflict has been shaped less by American national interests than by pressure from a foreign ally, a charge that Levin, a longtime defender of Israel and of Trump, forcefully rejected.
Levin opened by challenging Kents premise that the former president had been manipulated rather than exercising his own judgment as commander in chief.
[Trump] made a decision. Cant you accept the fact that hes a great president, that he took in all this information, he listened to all his advisers, that he made a decision? Levin said. You may disagree with him. But why are you creating a conspiratorial notion that Israel, nine-and-a-half million people, a tiny economy and everything, dragged powerful Donald Trump and the United States into war? Where did you come up with that one?
Kent responded by insisting that Israels government and media ecosystem had steadily shifted Washingtons red lines on Irans nuclear program, undermining diplomatic options and steering events toward confrontation.
In this administration, I watched the Israeli media echo chamber and the Israeli government I watched the red line move from no nukes to no enrichment. That basically short-circuited the ability for there to be a deal leading us basically to a military conflict that was driven by Israel, Kent said.
He further claimed that Tehran had been constrained for years by a religious edict, arguing that Irans leadership was not actively pursuing a nuclear weapon.
Kent asserted that a fatwa issued by Ayatollah Ali Khomenei has forbid Irans development of a nuclear weapon since 2004. Levin countered that U.S. intelligence and senior administration officials had repeatedly warned that Iran possessed significant nuclear capabilities and was not negotiating in good faith, and he accused Kent of unfairly shifting responsibility away from the regime in Tehran and onto Israel.
Pressing Kent to reconcile his theory with the administrations stated rationale, Levin cited Trumps own explanation for the strikes.
Joe Kent, the president said he decided to take these steps because the Iranians werent negotiating in good faith, his envoys backed him and say they just told us they have all this nuclear material and that theyre not gonna give it up, that theyre not gonna give it to a third party and a number of other things and you say it was Israel, explain, Levin said.
Kent maintained that the real trigger for escalation was Israeli military action, not an imminent Iranian strike on American forces.
The Israelis launched the attack and we knew that the Iranians would counterattack. The only imminent attack was actually the Israelis launching the attack and so thats what got us into this, Kent said.
Levin immediately pushed back, noting that both the White House and Israeli officials have rejected the notion that Washington was dragged into the conflict against its will.
Thats been denied, Joe, Levin said. Hold on, Joe. That President of the United States said he dragged the Israelis in.
Kent went on to argue that Israels strategic objective was to draw the United States into a broader confrontation aimed at toppling the Iranian regime, a goal he portrayed as contrary to U.S. interests.
Kent further said Israel wanted the U.S. in the conflict to facilitate regime change in Iran. In response, Levin accused Kent of being conspiratorial.
The former counterterrorism official framed his objections in terms of American sovereignty and constitutional control over decisions of war and peace.
I dont think a foreign government should be allowed to dictate when we go to war, Kent said. I dont think they did. I think the president, Joe, youre gonna keep mentioning Israelis, its getting very boring and silly. The president made a decision, the president said he made the decision, Levin replied.
While the Trump administration has consistently defended the legality and necessity of the February 28 strikes, it has not publicly detailed the specific imminent threat Iran allegedly posed to the United States at that moment. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that the attacks were to protect Americans troops from Iranian counterattacks, while White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the strikes were meant to destroy Irans nuclear capabilities and degrade its ballistic missile program.
Senior officials have also emphasized that Israel viewed Iran as an existential danger and was prepared to act alone if necessary, underscoring the stakes for Americas closest ally in the region even as critics question the extent of Israeli influence on U.S. policy.
Top administration officials told congressional members in February that Israel would have acted with or without the U.S. since Iran posed an existential threat to their nation. The clash between Levin and Kent thus reflects a deeper divide on the right over how firmly Washington should align its military decisions with the security concerns of Israel while preserving a clear, America-first standard for the use of force.
Login