Rubio and Vance, two potential leading figures in the Republican Party’s 2028 presidential contest, have been presenting sharply different postures toward the Iran war inside the Trump administration, according to an episode described by the Associated Press.
The exchange came as President Donald Trump assembled his Cabinet last week and asked Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance for updates on the war. Rubio delivered an impassioned defense, portraying the conflict as “a favor” to the United States and the world, while Vance spoke more cautiously about the United States’ position, saying the country had “options” that it did not have a year earlier and underscoring that Iran must not be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon.
During the same discussion, Vance appeared to pivot away from the Iran war as the conversation shifted to other matters, including wishing the troops a happy Easter, a detail that drew attention because of the context. Curt Mills, executive director of The American Conservative and a vocal critic of the war, said the Cabinet episode was telling because it seemed Vance was “literally trying to talk about anything else other than the war,” adding that it was “very obvious from the way that Rubio talks about Iran and the way that Vance talks about Iran” that they reflected “different casts of mind.”
The White House responded with an unsolicited statement Wednesday after the initial publication of the report about the Rubio-Vance episode. White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said Trump has “full confidence” in both Vance and Rubio and described them as “trusted voices within the administration,” adding that the president “values both the vice president and the secretary’s opinions and wealth of expertise.”
The episode lands as Republicans begin early jockeying for the next nomination fight. With Vance and Rubio viewed by many in the party as strong potential candidates in a 2028 primary, each faces the political challenge of balancing their roles in the administration with plans for their future, as the Iran war continues to shape public and internal debate.
Vance’s approach to the conflict has also contrasted with Rubio’s in earlier remarks captured by reporters. The Associated Press report says Vance has argued that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon while also expressing skepticism about foreign military interventions more broadly. It also notes that Trump has characterized Vance as having been “philosophically a little bit different than me” at the outset of the conflict.
At the same time, the report says Vance has been careful about how he answers questions about his views on the war. On a March 13 trip to North Carolina, reporters twice asked whether he had concerns about the conflict, and Vance responded that it was important that Trump could speak with advisers “without his team then running their mouths to the American media,” according to the report. Later, when asked the same question at the White House, Vance accused the reporter of trying “to drive a wedge between members of the administration, between me and the president.”
Rubio, the report says, had supported a muscular approach toward foreign policy and intervention before becoming chief diplomat. Days into the war, he told reporters it was “a wise decision” for Trump to launch the operation, that there “absolutely was an imminent threat” from Iran, and that the operation “needed to happen.” State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott pointed to the Cabinet meeting as evidence, saying “the entire administration is in lockstep behind President Trump,” and added that Rubio has a “great relationship” with the rest of the team.
The Associated Press report also described polling and conversations with Republicans that show the Iran war is already dividing opinion inside the party. A survey from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found about half of Republicans said the U.S. military action has been “about right,” while about 2 in 10 said it has not gone far enough and about one-quarter said it has gone too far. In the view of some Republican voters interviewed in North Carolina and Texas, the question of whether Vance and Rubio truly differ may matter less than whether they remain aligned with Trump’s decisions.
Alice Swanson, 62, who attended Vance’s event in North Carolina, said she wants Vance and Rubio to run together in 2028 but favors the vice president, saying she believes he “fully believes and supports exactly what his convictions are.” Swanson acknowledged, however, that Vance had previously taken positions hostile to interventionist policies and has been quieter on the subject since the war. She also said, “I can see both sides.”
Other voters interviewed by the Associated Press indicated different levels of trust in the two men. Tracy Brill, 62, speaking from Rocky Mount, described her support as aligning with Trump while praising Rubio as well, saying, “I love JD Vance,” and that the course the president had taken was “spot on.” Joe Ropar, 72, a retired military contractor, said he preferred Rubio and that it was “for stuff like that,” adding, “I don’t 100% trust him.” Benjamin Williams, a 25-year-old marketing specialist for Young Americans for Liberty in Austin, Texas, said at CPAC that both Trump and Vance are “tied to this war,” and said he was looking elsewhere for a candidate.
Whether the war becomes a political problem for Vance and Rubio may depend on who enters the GOP’s presidential primary field and how the conflict develops, according to the report. It says former New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu expects a half dozen high-profile Republicans to enter the contest, and that Sununu and former Republican National Committee committeewoman Juliana Bergeron told the AP that multiple presidential prospects have reached out to them recently to discuss the political landscape in New Hampshire. They declined to name the prospects.
Jim Merrill, a Republican strategist and a top New Hampshire adviser for Rubio’s 2016 bid, predicted that the Iran war will become a flashpoint in 2028, drawing a parallel to how the Iraq war became a dividing line for Democrats in 2004 and 2008. Sununu, though, said he doubts the Iran war would become a meaningful dividing line in a matchup between Vance and Rubio because both are prominent members of the Trump administration.
“They’re tied together with the success or failure of Iran,” Sununu said, adding that it “doesn’t really separate one versus the other,” at least as he expects the electorate might view it.