Trump's MAGA base defies conservative pro-Israel doctrine
Images of starvation and suffering in Gaza have given new impetus to a debate that has been simmering in Trump's "MAGA" movement over whether US involvement in the Middle East is consistent with the president's "America First" platform.
Trump's first significant break with Israel came on Monday, when he acknowledged that "real starvation" is happening in Gaza and vowed to set up food centers in the besieged enclave, which has been devastated by Israel's war with Hamas.
Asked if he agreed with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's denials of the Gaza hunger crisis, Trump said: "Based on television, I would say not particularly, because those children look very hungry."
It was a notable retort and prompted commentators to speculate that unwavering US support for Israel might end up as just another conservative sacred cow slayed by MAGA.
Vice President JD Vance went further at an event in Ohio, discussing "heartbreaking" images of "little kids who are clearly starving to death" and demanding that Israel let in more aid.
Political scientist and former US diplomat Michael Montgomery thinks the tonal shift might in part be emotional -- with TV images of starving children resonating more profoundly than the aftermath of air strikes.
"Perhaps it is because no civilized people see starvation as a legitimate weapon of war," the University of Michigan-Dearborn professor told AFP.
Israel has always enjoyed broad bipartisan support in Congress but the rise of the isolationist MAGA movement under Trump has challenged the ideological foundations of the "special relationship."
MAGA realpolitik seeks to limit US involvement in foreign wars to those that directly impact its interests, and in particular the "left behind" working class that makes up Trump's base.
- 'Almost no support' -
Pro-Trump think tank The Heritage Foundation in March called on Washington to "re-orient its relationship with Israel" from a special relationship "to an equal strategic partnership."
Stronger expressions of disapproval have been subdued by a sense that they are a betrayal of Republican thinking, according to some analysts -- especially after the October 7 Hamas attacks.
But there is a new urgency in the debate in MAGA circles following dire warnings from leading NGOs and the UN World Food Program's finding that a third of Gaza's population -- of about two million -- go for days without eating.
One sign of the new thinking came in an X post from far-right firebrand congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has pushed to cancel $500 million in funding for Israel's rocket defense system.
Greene this week went further than any Republican lawmaker has previously in using the word "genocide" to describe Israel's conduct and slamming the "starvation of innocent people and children in Gaza."
While Greene's credibility has been undermined by an extensive record of conspiratorial social media posts, there is no denying that she knows what makes the MAGA crowd tick.
A new CNN poll found the share of Republicans who believe Israel's actions have been fully justified has dropped from 68 percent in 2023 to 52 percent.
Youth seems to be the driver, according to a Pew Research poll from April, when food shortages had yet to become a humanitarian catastrophe.
While Republicans over age 50 haven't changed much in their pro-Israel outlook since 2022, the survey showed that the US ally's unfavorability among younger adults has climbed from 35 percent to 50 percent.
"It seems that for the under-30-year-old MAGA base, Israel has almost no support," former White House strategist Steve Bannon told Politico, adding that Trump's rebuke would solidify his supporters' enmity.
Democratic strategist Mike Nellis described the Gaza food emergency as "one of those rare moments where the crisis has broken through the usual partisan gridlock."
"You're seeing people across the political spectrum who just can't stomach it anymore," he told AFP.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
an hour ago
- The Advertiser
US appeals court keeps ban on LA immigration arrests
A federal appeals court has affirmed a lower court's decision temporarily barring US government agents from making immigration-related arrests in Los Angeles without probable cause. Rejecting the Trump administration's request to pause the lower court's order, the three-judge appeals panel ruled the plaintiffs would likely be able to prove that federal agents had carried out arrests based on people's appearance, language and where they lived or worked. President Donald Trump called National Guard troops and US Marines into Los Angeles in June in response to protests against the immigration raids, marking an extraordinary use of military force to support civilian police operations within the United States. The city of Los Angeles and other Southern California municipalities joined a lawsuit filed in June by the American Civil Liberties Union, accusing federal agents of using unlawful police tactics such as racial profiling to meet immigration arrest quotas set by the administration. A California judge in July blocked the Trump administration from racially profiling immigrants as it seeks deportation targets and from denying immigrants' right to access to lawyers during their detention. In Friday's unsigned decision, the judges of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit largely rejected the administration's appeal of the temporary restraining order. The judges agreed with the lower court in blocking federal officials from detaining people based solely on "apparent race or ethnicity", speaking Spanish or accented English, or being at locations such as a "bus stop, car wash, tow yard, day labourer pick up site, agricultural site, etc". The Department of Homeland Security and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not immediately respond to requests for comment outside business hours. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the order a victory for the city. "The Temporary Restraining Order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now," she said in a statement. Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff lawyer at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, also welcomed the ruling. "This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region," he said in a statement. A federal appeals court has affirmed a lower court's decision temporarily barring US government agents from making immigration-related arrests in Los Angeles without probable cause. Rejecting the Trump administration's request to pause the lower court's order, the three-judge appeals panel ruled the plaintiffs would likely be able to prove that federal agents had carried out arrests based on people's appearance, language and where they lived or worked. President Donald Trump called National Guard troops and US Marines into Los Angeles in June in response to protests against the immigration raids, marking an extraordinary use of military force to support civilian police operations within the United States. The city of Los Angeles and other Southern California municipalities joined a lawsuit filed in June by the American Civil Liberties Union, accusing federal agents of using unlawful police tactics such as racial profiling to meet immigration arrest quotas set by the administration. A California judge in July blocked the Trump administration from racially profiling immigrants as it seeks deportation targets and from denying immigrants' right to access to lawyers during their detention. In Friday's unsigned decision, the judges of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit largely rejected the administration's appeal of the temporary restraining order. The judges agreed with the lower court in blocking federal officials from detaining people based solely on "apparent race or ethnicity", speaking Spanish or accented English, or being at locations such as a "bus stop, car wash, tow yard, day labourer pick up site, agricultural site, etc". The Department of Homeland Security and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not immediately respond to requests for comment outside business hours. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the order a victory for the city. "The Temporary Restraining Order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now," she said in a statement. Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff lawyer at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, also welcomed the ruling. "This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region," he said in a statement. A federal appeals court has affirmed a lower court's decision temporarily barring US government agents from making immigration-related arrests in Los Angeles without probable cause. Rejecting the Trump administration's request to pause the lower court's order, the three-judge appeals panel ruled the plaintiffs would likely be able to prove that federal agents had carried out arrests based on people's appearance, language and where they lived or worked. President Donald Trump called National Guard troops and US Marines into Los Angeles in June in response to protests against the immigration raids, marking an extraordinary use of military force to support civilian police operations within the United States. The city of Los Angeles and other Southern California municipalities joined a lawsuit filed in June by the American Civil Liberties Union, accusing federal agents of using unlawful police tactics such as racial profiling to meet immigration arrest quotas set by the administration. A California judge in July blocked the Trump administration from racially profiling immigrants as it seeks deportation targets and from denying immigrants' right to access to lawyers during their detention. In Friday's unsigned decision, the judges of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit largely rejected the administration's appeal of the temporary restraining order. The judges agreed with the lower court in blocking federal officials from detaining people based solely on "apparent race or ethnicity", speaking Spanish or accented English, or being at locations such as a "bus stop, car wash, tow yard, day labourer pick up site, agricultural site, etc". The Department of Homeland Security and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not immediately respond to requests for comment outside business hours. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the order a victory for the city. "The Temporary Restraining Order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now," she said in a statement. Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff lawyer at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, also welcomed the ruling. "This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region," he said in a statement. A federal appeals court has affirmed a lower court's decision temporarily barring US government agents from making immigration-related arrests in Los Angeles without probable cause. Rejecting the Trump administration's request to pause the lower court's order, the three-judge appeals panel ruled the plaintiffs would likely be able to prove that federal agents had carried out arrests based on people's appearance, language and where they lived or worked. President Donald Trump called National Guard troops and US Marines into Los Angeles in June in response to protests against the immigration raids, marking an extraordinary use of military force to support civilian police operations within the United States. The city of Los Angeles and other Southern California municipalities joined a lawsuit filed in June by the American Civil Liberties Union, accusing federal agents of using unlawful police tactics such as racial profiling to meet immigration arrest quotas set by the administration. A California judge in July blocked the Trump administration from racially profiling immigrants as it seeks deportation targets and from denying immigrants' right to access to lawyers during their detention. In Friday's unsigned decision, the judges of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit largely rejected the administration's appeal of the temporary restraining order. The judges agreed with the lower court in blocking federal officials from detaining people based solely on "apparent race or ethnicity", speaking Spanish or accented English, or being at locations such as a "bus stop, car wash, tow yard, day labourer pick up site, agricultural site, etc". The Department of Homeland Security and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not immediately respond to requests for comment outside business hours. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the order a victory for the city. "The Temporary Restraining Order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now," she said in a statement. Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff lawyer at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, also welcomed the ruling. "This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region," he said in a statement.
The Advertiser
an hour ago
- The Advertiser
India will continue to buy Russian oil, officials say
India will keep purchasing oil from Russia despite US President Donald Trump's threats of penalties, two Indian government sources say, not wishing to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter. "These are long-term oil contracts," one of the sources said. "It is not so simple to just stop buying overnight." Trump indicated in a Truth Social post in July that India would face additional penalties for purchases of Russian arms and oil. On Friday, Trump told reporters that he had heard India would no longer be buying oil from Russia. The New York Times on Saturday quoted two unnamed senior Indian officials as saying there had been no change in Indian government policy, with one official saying the government had "not given any direction to oil companies" to cut back imports from Russia. Reuters reported this week that Indian state refiners stopped buying Russian oil in the past week after discounts narrowed in July. "On our energy sourcing requirements ... we look at what is there available in the markets, what is there on offer, and also what is the prevailing global situation or circumstances," India's foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal told reporters during a regular briefing on Friday. Jaiswal said India had a "steady and time-tested partnership" with Russia, and that New Delhi's relations with various countries stood on their merit and should not be viewed from the prism of a third country. The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Indian refiners are pulling back from Russian crude as discounts shrink to their lowest since 2022, when Western sanctions were first imposed on Moscow, due to lower Russian exports and steady demand, sources said earlier this week. The country's state refiners - Indian Oil Corp, Hindustan Petroleum Corp, Bharat Petroleum Corp and Mangalore Refinery Petrochemical Ltd - have not sought Russian crude in the past week or so, four sources familiar with the refiners' purchase plans told Reuters. On July 14, Trump threatened 100 per cent tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil unless Moscow reaches a major peace deal with Ukraine. Russia is the top supplier to India, responsible for about 35 per cent of India's overall supplies. Russia continued to be the top oil supplier to India during the first six months of 2025, accounting for about 35 per cent of India's overall supplies, followed by Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. India, the world's third-largest oil importer and consumer, received about 1.75 million barrels per day of Russian oil in January-June this year, up one per cent from a year ago, according to data provided to Reuters by sources. Nayara Energy, a major buyer of Russian oil, was recently sanctioned by the European Union as the refinery is majority-owned by Russian entities, including oil major Rosneft. In July, Reuters reported that Nayara's chief executive had resigned after the imposition of EU sanctions and company veteran Sergey Denisov had been appointed as CEO. Three vessels laden with oil products from Nayara Energy have yet to discharge their cargoes, hindered by the new EU sanctions on the Russia-backed refiner, Reuters reported in July. India will keep purchasing oil from Russia despite US President Donald Trump's threats of penalties, two Indian government sources say, not wishing to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter. "These are long-term oil contracts," one of the sources said. "It is not so simple to just stop buying overnight." Trump indicated in a Truth Social post in July that India would face additional penalties for purchases of Russian arms and oil. On Friday, Trump told reporters that he had heard India would no longer be buying oil from Russia. The New York Times on Saturday quoted two unnamed senior Indian officials as saying there had been no change in Indian government policy, with one official saying the government had "not given any direction to oil companies" to cut back imports from Russia. Reuters reported this week that Indian state refiners stopped buying Russian oil in the past week after discounts narrowed in July. "On our energy sourcing requirements ... we look at what is there available in the markets, what is there on offer, and also what is the prevailing global situation or circumstances," India's foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal told reporters during a regular briefing on Friday. Jaiswal said India had a "steady and time-tested partnership" with Russia, and that New Delhi's relations with various countries stood on their merit and should not be viewed from the prism of a third country. The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Indian refiners are pulling back from Russian crude as discounts shrink to their lowest since 2022, when Western sanctions were first imposed on Moscow, due to lower Russian exports and steady demand, sources said earlier this week. The country's state refiners - Indian Oil Corp, Hindustan Petroleum Corp, Bharat Petroleum Corp and Mangalore Refinery Petrochemical Ltd - have not sought Russian crude in the past week or so, four sources familiar with the refiners' purchase plans told Reuters. On July 14, Trump threatened 100 per cent tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil unless Moscow reaches a major peace deal with Ukraine. Russia is the top supplier to India, responsible for about 35 per cent of India's overall supplies. Russia continued to be the top oil supplier to India during the first six months of 2025, accounting for about 35 per cent of India's overall supplies, followed by Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. India, the world's third-largest oil importer and consumer, received about 1.75 million barrels per day of Russian oil in January-June this year, up one per cent from a year ago, according to data provided to Reuters by sources. Nayara Energy, a major buyer of Russian oil, was recently sanctioned by the European Union as the refinery is majority-owned by Russian entities, including oil major Rosneft. In July, Reuters reported that Nayara's chief executive had resigned after the imposition of EU sanctions and company veteran Sergey Denisov had been appointed as CEO. Three vessels laden with oil products from Nayara Energy have yet to discharge their cargoes, hindered by the new EU sanctions on the Russia-backed refiner, Reuters reported in July. India will keep purchasing oil from Russia despite US President Donald Trump's threats of penalties, two Indian government sources say, not wishing to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter. "These are long-term oil contracts," one of the sources said. "It is not so simple to just stop buying overnight." Trump indicated in a Truth Social post in July that India would face additional penalties for purchases of Russian arms and oil. On Friday, Trump told reporters that he had heard India would no longer be buying oil from Russia. The New York Times on Saturday quoted two unnamed senior Indian officials as saying there had been no change in Indian government policy, with one official saying the government had "not given any direction to oil companies" to cut back imports from Russia. Reuters reported this week that Indian state refiners stopped buying Russian oil in the past week after discounts narrowed in July. "On our energy sourcing requirements ... we look at what is there available in the markets, what is there on offer, and also what is the prevailing global situation or circumstances," India's foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal told reporters during a regular briefing on Friday. Jaiswal said India had a "steady and time-tested partnership" with Russia, and that New Delhi's relations with various countries stood on their merit and should not be viewed from the prism of a third country. The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Indian refiners are pulling back from Russian crude as discounts shrink to their lowest since 2022, when Western sanctions were first imposed on Moscow, due to lower Russian exports and steady demand, sources said earlier this week. The country's state refiners - Indian Oil Corp, Hindustan Petroleum Corp, Bharat Petroleum Corp and Mangalore Refinery Petrochemical Ltd - have not sought Russian crude in the past week or so, four sources familiar with the refiners' purchase plans told Reuters. On July 14, Trump threatened 100 per cent tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil unless Moscow reaches a major peace deal with Ukraine. Russia is the top supplier to India, responsible for about 35 per cent of India's overall supplies. Russia continued to be the top oil supplier to India during the first six months of 2025, accounting for about 35 per cent of India's overall supplies, followed by Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. India, the world's third-largest oil importer and consumer, received about 1.75 million barrels per day of Russian oil in January-June this year, up one per cent from a year ago, according to data provided to Reuters by sources. Nayara Energy, a major buyer of Russian oil, was recently sanctioned by the European Union as the refinery is majority-owned by Russian entities, including oil major Rosneft. In July, Reuters reported that Nayara's chief executive had resigned after the imposition of EU sanctions and company veteran Sergey Denisov had been appointed as CEO. Three vessels laden with oil products from Nayara Energy have yet to discharge their cargoes, hindered by the new EU sanctions on the Russia-backed refiner, Reuters reported in July. India will keep purchasing oil from Russia despite US President Donald Trump's threats of penalties, two Indian government sources say, not wishing to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter. "These are long-term oil contracts," one of the sources said. "It is not so simple to just stop buying overnight." Trump indicated in a Truth Social post in July that India would face additional penalties for purchases of Russian arms and oil. On Friday, Trump told reporters that he had heard India would no longer be buying oil from Russia. The New York Times on Saturday quoted two unnamed senior Indian officials as saying there had been no change in Indian government policy, with one official saying the government had "not given any direction to oil companies" to cut back imports from Russia. Reuters reported this week that Indian state refiners stopped buying Russian oil in the past week after discounts narrowed in July. "On our energy sourcing requirements ... we look at what is there available in the markets, what is there on offer, and also what is the prevailing global situation or circumstances," India's foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal told reporters during a regular briefing on Friday. Jaiswal said India had a "steady and time-tested partnership" with Russia, and that New Delhi's relations with various countries stood on their merit and should not be viewed from the prism of a third country. The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Indian refiners are pulling back from Russian crude as discounts shrink to their lowest since 2022, when Western sanctions were first imposed on Moscow, due to lower Russian exports and steady demand, sources said earlier this week. The country's state refiners - Indian Oil Corp, Hindustan Petroleum Corp, Bharat Petroleum Corp and Mangalore Refinery Petrochemical Ltd - have not sought Russian crude in the past week or so, four sources familiar with the refiners' purchase plans told Reuters. On July 14, Trump threatened 100 per cent tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil unless Moscow reaches a major peace deal with Ukraine. Russia is the top supplier to India, responsible for about 35 per cent of India's overall supplies. Russia continued to be the top oil supplier to India during the first six months of 2025, accounting for about 35 per cent of India's overall supplies, followed by Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. India, the world's third-largest oil importer and consumer, received about 1.75 million barrels per day of Russian oil in January-June this year, up one per cent from a year ago, according to data provided to Reuters by sources. Nayara Energy, a major buyer of Russian oil, was recently sanctioned by the European Union as the refinery is majority-owned by Russian entities, including oil major Rosneft. In July, Reuters reported that Nayara's chief executive had resigned after the imposition of EU sanctions and company veteran Sergey Denisov had been appointed as CEO. Three vessels laden with oil products from Nayara Energy have yet to discharge their cargoes, hindered by the new EU sanctions on the Russia-backed refiner, Reuters reported in July.
The Age
3 hours ago
- The Age
‘A threat was made': Trump repositions nuclear subs after online spat with ex-Russian leader
Washington: In a warning to Russia, US President Donald Trump said Friday he's ordering the repositioning of two US nuclear submarines 'based on the highly provocative statements' of the country's former president, Dmitry Medvedev, who has raised the prospect of war online. Trump posted on his social media site that, based on the 'highly provocative statements' from Medvedev, he had 'ordered two Nuclear Submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that'. The president added, 'Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences, I hope this will not be one of those instances.' He told US cable network Newsmax Friday night Washington time (Saturday AEST) that the submarines had been moved closer to Russia. It wasn't clear what impact Trump's order would have on US nuclear subs, which are routinely on patrol in the world's hotspots, but it comes at a delicate moment in the Trump administration's relations with Moscow. Trump said later Friday that he was alarmed by Medvedev's attitude. 'He's got a fresh mouth,' he said in an interview with Newsmax on Saturday AEST. Trump has said that special envoy Steve Witkoff is heading to Russia to push Moscow to agree to a ceasefire in its war with Ukraine and has threatened new economic sanctions if progress is not made. He cut his 50-day deadline for action to 10 days, with that window set to expire next week. The post about the sub repositioning came after Trump, in the wee hours of Thursday morning, had posted that Medvedev was a 'failed former President of Russia' and warned him to 'watch his words'.
