Between America and conscience, this U.S. senior official chose conscience

How has AI Kent’s personal experience influenced his decision to resign?

“I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran,” said Joseph Kent, the recently resigned director of the U.S. National Counterterrorism Center.

Image source: BBC report screenshot

On March 17, local time, this veteran of 20 years in the U.S. military, who has completed 11 combat deployments, took an unusual stance, nearly breaking with President Trump publicly.

Kent’s resignation letter was like a scalpel, tearing open the illusion of White House unity and exposing divisions and conflicts.

Trump dismissively accused Kent of being “soft on security,” while Vice President Pence dodged questions from the media about the U.S.-Israel-Iran conflict… This war, seen by outsiders as “fought for Israel’s interests,” is tearing the U.S. leadership apart between “conscience” and “politics,” with internal strife intensifying.

“This is not America’s war”

Kent’s resignation drew widespread attention not only because he was personally appointed by Trump as the top counterterrorism official but also because his background made his criticism particularly weighty.

In his open letter to Trump, Kent did not use bureaucratic clichés but directly exposed the White House’s core justification for war—the “imminent threat.”

He candidly wrote: “Iran does not pose an imminent threat to the United States, and it is clear that this war is driven by pressure from Israel and its powerful lobbying groups in the U.S.”

He further stated that he could not support sending U.S. troops into a war that is “of no benefit to the American people and cannot justify sacrificing American lives.”

Kent is not just talking on paper.

According to BBC, as a long-time supporter of Trump, Kent also has another identity: a highly decorated American veteran.

The Hill reports that Kent has extensive combat experience, having served multiple times in Iraq and Afghanistan. This battlefield background gives him a unique perspective as head of the Counterterrorism Center.

Over the past year, he led efforts to shift the focus of the National Counterterrorism Center to align with the Trump administration’s priorities—targeting groups listed as “foreign terrorist organizations” by the White House.

What makes his words even more persuasive may be his personal tragic experience.

The Daily Mirror reports that Kent’s wife is a victim of what he calls “a war manufactured by Israel.” This personal experience led Kent to warn that the U.S. is repeating history: “This is the same set of lies that dragged us into the disastrous Iraq War.”

He also criticized Trump’s close relationship with Israel, even its reliance on Israel, repeatedly emphasizing that Israel’s lobbying activities “have involved the U.S. in unnecessary wars for years.”

After this letter was made public, it quickly triggered a chain reaction in Washington.

Trump responded to reporters at the White House: “I’ve always thought he was a good guy, but I’ve also always believed he’s soft on security. His departure is a good thing.” White House Press Secretary strongly countered, asserting that the president has “solid and compelling evidence” that Iran plans to attack the U.S. first.

Perhaps the most awkward person is Kent’s immediate superior, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines. Known as a prominent anti-war advocate, she previously shared similar views with Kent, but during this controversy, she issued only a cautious statement that did not mention Kent at all. For Washington observers, this silence may itself be a stance.

“Creating a rift between me and the president”

If Kent’s resignation is seen as an “open declaration of war,” then Vice President Pence’s silence is “a silent undercurrent.”

Photos taken during the U.S.-Israel military strike on Iran show that during a crisis meeting at Mar-a-Lago, Trump and Defense Secretary Austin, Secretary of State Blinken, and other officials were focused on the screen, while Pence was absent.

The White House explained that Pence was hosting another meeting in Washington and could not attend due to “security protocols.” However, foreign media widely believe this reveals Pence’s exclusion from key decision-making circles.

The Atlantic Monthly suggests that within the U.S. government, “the vice president’s opinions are increasingly irrelevant.”

Analysts say that there is a clear split within Trump’s team: a minority supports Pence and opposes the war; the majority, represented by Ramaswamy, advocates for military action.

Trump himself has not hidden his disagreements with Pence. He told the media that Pence has “some differences in views on Iran” and “may not be as enthusiastic.”

When asked whether he fully supports the war, Pence’s response was telling.

He avoided his previous anti-war stance and somewhat resentfully told reporters: “I know what you’re trying to do. You want to create a rift between me and the president.” He emphasized that he believes in the “smart” Trump president who will not repeat past government mistakes.

This language of “trusting the president” rather than “supporting the war” is interpreted by foreign media as a carefully crafted dodge.

More subtly, during Trump’s first press conference after the escalation of the U.S.-Israel-Iran conflict, he praised Ramaswamy for his hawkish stance but did not mention Pence at all. Meanwhile, Ramaswamy’s support in the 2028 Republican primary polls has surged.

This Middle East conflict is reshaping the power dynamics within the Republican Party.

Who will be the next to leave?

Trump once rallied supporters under the banners of “America First” and “No New Wars,” but now the Iran war is causing the once solid “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) camp to fracture.

According to U.S. media, grassroots voters still support Trump, but key opinion leaders are defecting.

Besides Kent’s resignation, Trump’s former chief strategist Steve Bannon, a staunch “America First” advocate, has publicly opposed the war.

Conservative commentator Tucker Carlson bluntly stated that the Iran conflict is a long-planned result of Israel’s strategy and supported his friend Kent: “He’s one of the bravest people I know. Someone is trying to destroy him now. He understands that, but he did it anyway.”

Former Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene also sharply criticized. She publicly questioned Pence’s whereabouts due to his silence and directly accused Trump of breaking his promise of “no more foreign wars,” calling it a “lie.”

Analysts believe that Greene and Pence are seen as strong contenders for the 2028 U.S. presidential race. Their political distancing from the hawks at this moment suggests they recognize that while the MAGA base currently supports the war, prolonged conflict and rising oil prices could quickly revive anti-war sentiments.

This internal conflict—“Establishment vs. Isolationists,” “Israel First vs. America First”—is intensifying within the Trump administration.

On one side are the hawkish Defense Secretary and Secretary of State, pushing for escalation; on the other are the traditional anti-war faction, disappointed and resigning.

Senior researcher at the Brookings Institution succinctly summarized: Trump has broken his campaign promise to the MAGA base, creating a huge political dilemma for himself—“the longer the war lasts, the more difficult it will be for him.”

Kent has left. Who will be next?

Is it the awkward Director of Intelligence Avril Haines, or Pence, absent from the crisis room? Or perhaps, as U.S. media speculate, Trump is using this war as a chessboard to test loyalty between Pence and Ramaswamy, subtly shaping the Republican Party’s future.

A resignation in the name of “conscience” has deepened the cracks within the U.S. It raises a fundamental question: Whose war is this? And for whose peace?