Follow us on social

Steve Witkoff

Trump envoy calls out neocons pushing for war with Iran

'They give no consideration whatsoever on what the consequences are on that'

Analysis | QiOSK

President Trump’s foreign policy envoy on Thursday criticized those who are trying to undermine the president’s negotiations to place limits on Iran’s nuclear program, saying they have a “bias toward military action,” adding that he and Trump instead wanted to put diplomacy first in U.S. foreign relations.

“In their minds, anything that is of a military nature to be a solution to that problem, they have a bias towards that. They give no consideration whatsoever on what the consequences are on that,” envoy Steven Witkoff said during an interview with Breitbart. “The neocon element believes that war is the only way to solve things.”

Trump “believes in peace through strength, which essentially means that resorting to violence and war is not necessarily in the best interest of the country and not necessarily the best way to effect truces, ceasefires, permanent peace — whatever we want to call it,” Witkoff added. “Dialogue and diplomacy are an avenue he wants to pursue each and every time because if he can get to a successful resolution that’s in the best interest of the United States.”

Witkoff’s comments come as more hawkish establishment conservatives are orchestrating a campaign to oppose the Trump administration’s diplomacy with Iran. But the White House and its allies are pushing back.

More recently, Trump reportedly fired his national security adviser Mike Waltz because Waltz was pushing for war with Iran in internal conversations on the issue. And Trump allies outside the administration — like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and conservative media star Tucker Carlson — have been increasingly vocal in criticizing Iran hawks.

Meanwhile, House and Senate Republicans this week started pushing their colleagues to call for only a full dismantlement of Iran’s program.

Witkoff appeared to push back on that effort during his interview with Breitbart while stressing a diplomacy-first approach.

“I believe in [Trump’s] policy of attempting to settle the Iranian conflict through dialogue. First of all, that’s a more permanent solution to that crisis than any other alternative,” he said. “If we get them [Iran] to voluntarily shift away from an enrichment program where they can enrich to not have centrifuges, to not have material that can be enriched to weapons-grade levels 90%. If we can get them to voluntarily do that, that is the most permanent way to make sure that they never get a weapon."


Top image credit: US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff speaks to reporters outside the West Wing of the White House in Washington, DC on March 6, 2025. (Photo by Oliver Contreras/Sipa USA)/ Reuters Connect
Analysis | QiOSK
Fort Bragg horrors expose dark underbelly of post-9/11 warfare
Top photo credit: Seth Harp book jacket (Viking press) US special operators/deviant art/creative commons

Fort Bragg horrors expose dark underbelly of post-9/11 warfare

Media

In 2020 and 2021, 109 U.S. soldiers died at Fort Bragg, the largest military base in the country and the central location for the key Special Operations Units in the American military.

Only four of them were on overseas deployments. The others died stateside, mostly of drug overdoses, violence, or suicide. The situation has hardly improved. It was recently revealed that another 51 soldiers died at Fort Bragg in 2023. According to U.S. government data, these represent more military fatalities than have occurred at the hands of enemy forces in any year since 2013.

keep readingShow less
Trump Netanyahu
Top image credit: President Donald Trump hosts a bilateral dinner for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Monday, July 7, 2025, in the Blue Room. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

The case for US Middle East retrenchment has never been clearer

Middle East

Is Israel becoming the new hegemon of the Middle East? The answer to this question is an important one.

Preventing the rise of a rival regional hegemon — a state with a preponderance of military and economic power — in Eurasia has long been a core goal of U.S. foreign policy. During the Cold War, Washington feared Soviet dominion over Europe. Today, U.S. policymakers worry that China’s increasingly capable military will crowd the United States out of Asia’s lucrative economic markets. The United States has also acted repeatedly to prevent close allies in Europe and Asia from becoming military competitors, using promises of U.S. military protection to keep them weak and dependent.

keep readingShow less
United Nations
Top image credit: lev radin / Shutterstock.com

Do we need a treaty on neutrality?

Global Crises

In an era of widespread use of economic sanctions, dual-use technology exports, and hybrid warfare, the boundary between peacetime and wartime has become increasingly blurry. Yet understandings of neutrality remain stuck in the time of trench warfare. An updated conception of neutrality, codified through an international treaty, is necessary for global security.

Neutrality in the 21st century is often whatever a country wants it to be. For some, such as the European neutrals like Switzerland and Ireland, it is compatible with non-U.N. sanctions (such as by the European Union) while for others it is not. Countries in the Global South are also more likely to take a case-by-case approach, such as choosing to not take a stance on a specific conflict and instead call for a peaceful resolution while others believe a moral position does not undermine neutrality.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.