JD Vance has previously argued against an American military attack on Iran on several occasions.
He has always been skeptical of such engagements in the Middle East, says Dag Blanck, professor of North American studies at Uppsala University.
"President Donald Trump will not drag the United States into a multi-year conflict without clear goals," Vance wrote on X in connection with an interview on Fox News a couple of days after the outbreak of the war.
After that, he was silent about the war until Monday, when reporters at the White House asked if he had any doubts about it.
"You are trying to drive a wedge between me and the president. What the president has consistently said since 2015, and I agree, is that Iran should not have nuclear weapons," he replied.
“Very doubtful”
"I think he is very skeptical about the war. He wrote an article in 2023 saying he is choosing Trump because Trump will not start new major war adventures," says Jan Hallenberg, professor emeritus of political science at the Swedish National Defense University.
In the article, which was published in The Wall Street Journal, Vance praises Trump for not starting new wars during his first four years in office, despite "enormous pressure from his own party."
Hallenberg does not believe that the vice president is prepared to explicitly say that he is against the war.
But he has not been prominent in defending the action.
Vance, who sees himself as a clear successor to Trump, remains loyal to the president, according to Blanck.
If you make friends with Trump, you can leave. Vance has ambitions for the 2028 election, and then it will be important who Trump supports.
Rubio or Vance?
The development of the Iran war could affect the hierarchy of the Trump administration. Marco Rubio - Vance's biggest competitor in the cabinet - has been praised by the president.
Trump has jokingly asked people lately whether they prefer Marco or Vance as a successor, Blanck says.
If Trump can credibly say that he won without major American losses, the situation would be easier to handle. Otherwise, the likelihood of conflicts within the Trump administration increases, which could benefit Rubio's position, says Jan Hallenberg.
In that case, Trump would pull his support from Vance and go to Rubio instead. It's not out of the question, but I don't think we're there yet.
