JD Vance’s silence on the Iran strikes is starting to get very loud

It is customary – some would say mandatory – for Donald Trump’s cabinet and inner circle to relentlessly boost and praise the US president on his success.

Cabinet meetings, at least the on-camera portion, are now Kumbaya sessions in which secretaries take turns to thank Trump for his leadership.

And when something big happens – like, say, bombing Iran and killing the supreme leader – they inevitably use social media to certify the brilliance of Trump’s latest action.

So it is noteworthy that for the past 48 hours, Vice President JD Vance has said next to nothing about Operation Epic Fury.

Vance’s only public comment on X was to repost from his vice presidential account a White House photograph showing him in the Situation Room during the operation, alongside Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.

On his personal account, Vance reposted a White House video of Trump’s latest video update.

It might be instructive that Vance wasn’t at Mar-a-Lago with Trump and top military adviser Dan “Razin” Caine, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, during the operation. Some commentators mocked the Situation Room gathering as the “kids’ table”.

Vance was elsewhere during the raid on Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, too, and later explained his absence as a strategic move to avoid raising suspicion in the Maduro regime. Perhaps that’s fair enough.

It’s also true that the whole administration has been uncharacteristically quiet since the strikes began. No cabinet secretaries or top officials appeared on the Sunday morning political talk shows – that was left to hawkish lawmakers in Congress such as senators Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham and Tom Cotton.

And Trump himself has not fronted the press, choosing to put out video updates and avoid the journalists on Air Force One as he returned from Florida – which is unusual.

But Vance’s total silence since the strikes began is striking, especially as he is ordinarily a prolific social media poster. Others have commented, even if relatively dispassionately.

Attorney-General Pam Bondi praised Trump for having the courage to “take bold, decisive action”. Wright said Iran had been a threat to peace for too long, and Trump was “moving decisively to protect American interests and strengthen security”. War Secretary Pete Hegseth, as you would expect, was effusive in his praise for both the president and the American military.

Vance’s office did not respond to a request for comment on Sunday night (US time).

Some reports in US media have suggested Vance was hesitant about the Iran campaign. The New York Times reported that in a White House meeting on February 18, Vance did not oppose strikes but “intensely questioned” Caine and CIA director John Ratcliffe, pressing for more debate about the risks and complexity of a mission. Vance would rightly say he was doing his job.

The Atlantic also reported that Vance had reservations about the strikes in the days beforehand, citing two US officials familiar with the matter.

Vance has always been sceptical of foreign entanglements, although not automatically. He supported the June 2025 strikes that destroyed or degraded Iran’s nuclear facilities, and appeared on NBC’s Meet the Press the next day, saying: “We’re not at war with Iran, we’re at war with Iran’s nuclear program … This is not going to be some long, drawn-out thing.”

If it’s the case that Vance is not happy, he is not alone in the MAGA world. Tucker Carlson, a former Fox News host and one of the most prominent isolationists in the movement, told ABC News America the attack on Iran was “absolutely disgusting and evil”, and predicted it would “shuffle the deck” in the America First movement.

Megyn Kelly, another former Fox personality and Trump supporter, drew attention to the fact Trump claimed June’s attack had totally obliterated Iran’s nuclear facilities.

“Here we are six months later saying we have to go back in to stop the nuclear program – the one that we just allegedly bombed and destroyed a few months ago,” she said.

Vance is attuned more than most people to the sensitivities of the MAGA base on these types of questions. He’s the one most likely to need to unify and cultivate that base in 2028 to become the next president.

No doubt he will soon have to offer some form of endorsement of the Iran campaign. He may be waiting as long as possible to see its effects, particularly the extent to which Iran retaliates and whether more American lives are lost.

Vance may believe – and Trump may agree – that there is no real upside to him being closely associated with this operation right now, but plenty of risk in two years time’ if it ends up going pear-shaped.

Get a note directly from our foreign correspondents on what’s making headlines around the world. Sign up for our weekly What in the World newsletter.