america first

United Nations — The Trump administration announced Tuesday that it will once again withdraw from the U.N. cultural agency UNESCO, an expected move that has the U.S. further retreating from international organizations.

The decision to pull U.S. funding and participation from UNESCO comes two years after the Biden administration rejoined following a controversial, five-year absence that began during President Trump’s first term. The White House cited similar concerns as it did in 2018, saying it believes U.S. involvement is not in its national interest and accusing the agency of promoting anti-Israel speech.

The decision, which won’t go into effect until December 2026, will deal a blow to an agency known for preserving cultural heritage through its UNESCO World Heritage Sites program — which recognizes significant landmarks for protection, ranging from the Taj Mahal to Egypt’s pyramids of Giza and the Grand Canyon National Park. The agency also empowers education and science across the globe.

It is the Trump administration’s latest move to pull support for U.N. agencies under a larger campaign to reshape U.S. diplomacy. Under the “America First” approach, the administration has pulled out of the U.N. World Health Organization and top U.N. human rights body, while reassessing its funding for others.

State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said in a statement that the withdrawal was linked to UNESCO’s perceived agenda to “advance divisive social and cultural causes.”

She added that UNESCO’s decision in 2011 “to admit the ‘State of Palestine’ as a Member State is highly problematic, contrary to U.S. policy, and contributed to the proliferation of anti-Israel rhetoric within the organization.”

UNESCO director general Audrey Azoulay said she “deeply” regrets the U.S. decision but said it was expected and that the agency “has prepared for it.” She also denied accusations of anti-Israel bias, saying it contradicts “the reality of UNESCO’s efforts, particularly in the field of Holocaust education and the fight against antisemitism.”

Azoulay added that “the reasons put forward by the United States of America are the same as seven years ago, even though the situation has changed profoundly, political tensions have receded, and UNESCO today constitutes a rare forum for consensus on concrete and action-oriented multilateralism.”

The Biden administration had rejoined UNESCO in 2023 after citing concerns that China was filling the gap left by the U.S. in UNESCO policymaking, notably in setting standards for artificial intelligence and technology education.

The withdrawal, which was first reported by the New York Post, came after a review ordered by the Trump administration earlier this year. While the U.S. had previously provided a notable share of the agency’s budget, UNESCO has diversified its funding sources in recent years as the U.S. contribution has decreased. Today, American assistance represents only 8% of the agency’s total budget.

Azoulay pledged that UNESCO will carry out its missions despite “inevitably reduced resources.” The agency said that it is not considering any staff layoffs at this stage.

“UNESCO’s purpose is to welcome all the nations of the world, and the United States of America is and always will be welcome,” she said. “We will continue to work hand in hand with all our American partners in the private sector, academia and non-profit organizations, and will pursue our political dialogue with the U.S. administration and Congress.”

The U.S. previously pulled out of UNESCO under the Reagan administration in 1984 because it viewed the agency as mismanaged, corrupt and used to advance the interests of the Soviet Union. It rejoined in 2003 during George W. Bush’s presidency.

Petrequin and Amiri write for the Associated Press. Petrequin reported from Brussels.

My young family and I were in Israel when the military and the Mossad began their offensive operations against Iran on Friday, June 13, commencing what President Trump has since called the “12-Day War.” Although the Mossad’s intelligence and the Israel Defense Forces’ rapid establishment of air superiority inside Iran proved to be nothing less than extraordinary, my wife and I lived on pins and needles for those first few days of the war. We had to be ready day or night, at a moment’s notice, to drop everything, grab our 6-month-old baby and race to the house’s “safe room” (that is, bomb shelter).

Trust me: This is not a fun way to live — especially not with an infant. Meanwhile, too many of Iran’s ballistic missiles — considerably more lethal than the rockets typically fired into Israel from Gaza and Lebanon — were evading Israeli air defense. They were finding their targets. Too many homes were being destroyed, and too many people, tragically, were being killed. Though a proud Jew and Zionist, and even the author of a recent book on Israel’s fate, I decided to do what any American parent of an infant would do in such a situation: get us home.

I am a Floridian, and I heard about a program the state of Florida had launched to evacuate American citizens from the war zone. We first took a bus to the Jordanian border. We next got to Amman, where we spent the night. We then flew to Cyprus, a hub for those fleeing (and returning to) Israel, where we also spent a night. And finally, we flew from Cyprus to Tampa, where Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis surprised our group by meeting us at the airport.

The day after my family got home to Florida, the world changed in an instant: Trump ordered Operation Midnight Hammer, delivering a devastating — perhaps fatal — blow to the Iranian regime’s three most prized nuclear facilities, Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan. In his brief remarks at the White House following the strikes, Trump repeatedly linked the national interests and fates of the United States and Israel. Despite months of tendentious leaks, palace intrigue and the often-parroted media reports of a rift between Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, that bilateral relationship is clearly stronger than ever.

Looking back at both the pre-strike debate and the post-strike fallout, the more interesting question — especially given the hostility toward Trump’s move from certain high-profile talking heads within the broader MAGA fold — is perhaps this: Is Midnight Hammer an aberration from Trump’s “America First” foreign policy doctrine, or is it entirely consistent with it?

As the definitive essay on the topic, a 2019 Foreign Policy magazine article — appropriately titled “The Trump Doctrine” — from former Trump administration national security official and current State Department Director of Policy Planning Michael Anton put it, Trump’s conception of “America First” means that he has “no inborn inclination to isolationism or interventionism, and he is not simply a dove or a hawk.” By contrast, Trump’s foreign policy instinct is “Jacksonian”: It is a strand of pragmatic conservative realism that is intuitively skeptical. The mindset echoes George Washington’s famous farewell address, which warned against getting overly involved overseas, but it also remains able, willing and eager to lash out and strike if necessary to defend core American national interests.

In short, Trump has no interest in reprising the Bush-era moralistic nation-building enterprise, but he also has no interest in burying America’s head in the sand and pretending that we simply have no interest in events abroad. It was Trump himself, after all, who both withdrew from President Obama’s flawed nuclear deal with the Iranian terror regime and eliminated Islamic State founder Abu Bakr Baghdadi and Qasem Soleimani, the Iranian general who commanded the Quds Force.

There are indeed some fools, ignoramuses and scoundrels on the right who keep trying to mislead their MAGA-friendly audiences by imputing to “America First” views that do not put America first and are not held by the president himself. But they are losing that battle: According to a recent CBS News poll, an astounding 94% of self-identified MAGA Republicans support Operation Midnight Hammer. It certainly seems that in voting for Trump, these Americans favored stopping the world’s No. 1 state sponsor of terrorism — a regime whose raison d’être is eliminating the “little Satan” of Israel and the “big Satan” of the United States — from acquiring the world’s most dangerous weapons.

After decades of debate about the Iranian nuclear program and months of pearl-clutching about the alleged imminence of World War III, the United States has devastated the illicit nuclear weapons program of a terrorist regime that chants “death to America” on a daily basis — without a single American casualty, without any extended American troop presence on the ground and with a quick post-strike ceasefire to boot. To achieve a decades-long-sought foreign policy objective in this fashion is nothing less than astonishing. Operation Midnight Hammer is one of the greatest acts of presidential statesmanship and leadership in modern American history.

It’s also “America First” in action. And looking back at the entire ordeal years from now, I strongly suspect it will also make everything my family went through in evacuating the Middle East more than worth it.

Josh Hammer’s latest book is “Israel and Civilization: The Fate of the Jewish Nation and the Destiny of the West.” This article was produced in collaboration with Creators Syndicate. @josh_hammer

President Trump’s decision to strike three nuclear sites in Iran will almost assuredly draw more criticism from some of his supporters, including high-profile backers who had said any such move would run counter to the anti-interventionism he promised to deliver.

The lead-up to the strike announced Saturday exposed fissures within Trump’s “Make America Great Again” base as some of that movement’s most vocal leaders, with large followings of their own, expressed deep concern about the prospect of U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran war.

With the president barred from seeking a third term, what remains unknown is how long-lasting the schism could be for Trump and his current priorities, as well as the overall future of his “America First” movement.

Among the surrogates who spoke out against American involvement were former senior advisor Steve Bannon, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), commentator Tucker Carlson and Charlie Kirk, the founder of the conservative youth organization Turning Point. Part of their consternation was rooted in Trump’s own vocalized antipathy for what he and others have termed the “forever wars” fomented in previous administrations.

As the possibility of military action neared, some of those voices tamped down their rhetoric. According to Trump, Carlson even called to “apologize.”

Here’s a look at what some of Trump’s biggest advocates had said about U.S. military involvement in Iran:

Steve Bannon

On Wednesday, Bannon, one of the top advisors in Trump’s 2016 campaign, told an audience in Washington that bitter feelings over Iraq were a driving force for Trump’s first presidential candidacy and the MAGA movement. “One of the core tenets is no forever wars,” Bannon said.

But the longtime Trump ally, who served a four-month sentence for defying a subpoena in the congressional investigation into the U.S. Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 2021, went on to suggest that Trump will maintain loyalty from his base no matter what. On Wednesday, Bannon acknowledged that while he and others will argue against military intervention until the end, “the MAGA movement will back Trump.”

Ultimately, Bannon said that Trump would have to make the case to the American people if he wanted to get involved in Iran.

“We don’t like it. Maybe we hate it,” Bannon said, predicting what the MAGA response would be. “But, you know, we’ll get on board.”

Tucker Carlson

The commentator’s rhetoric toward Trump was increasingly critical. Carlson, who headlined large rallies with the Republican during the 2024 campaign, earlier this month suggested that the president’s posture was breaking his pledge to keep the U.S. out of new foreign entanglements. Trump clapped back at Carlson on social media, calling him “kooky.”

During an event at the White House on Wednesday, Trump said that Carlson had “called and apologized” for calling him out. Trump said Carlson “is a nice guy.”

Carlson’s conversation with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) that day laid bare the divides among many Republicans. The two sparred for two hours over a variety of issues, primarily about possible U.S. involvement in Iran. Carlson accused Cruz of placing too much emphasis on protecting Israel in his foreign policy worldview.

“You don’t know anything about Iran,” Carlson said to Cruz, after the senator said he didn’t know Iran’s population or its ethnic composition. “You’re a senator who’s calling for the overthrow of a government, and you don’t know anything about the country.”

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene

The Georgia Republican, who wore the signature red MAGA cap for Democratic President Biden’s State of the Union address in 2024, publicly sided with Carlson, criticizing Trump for deriding “one of my favorite people.”

Saying the former Fox News commentator “unapologetically believes the same things I do,” Greene wrote on X this past week that those beliefs include that “foreign wars/intervention/regime change put America last, kill innocent people, are making us broke, and will ultimately lead to our destruction.”

“That’s not kooky,” Greene added, using the same word Trump used to describe Carlson. “That’s what millions of Americans voted for. It’s what we believe is America First.”

Alex Jones

The far-right conspiracy theorist and Infowars host posted on social media earlier in the week a side-by-side of Trump’s official presidential headshot and an artificial intelligence-generated composite of Trump and former Republican President George W. Bush. Trump and many of his allies have long disparaged Bush for involving the United States in the “forever wars” in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Writing “What you voted for” above Trump’s image and “What you got” above the composite, Jones added: “I hope this is not the case…”

Charlie Kirk

Kirk said in a Fox News interview at the start of the week that “this is the moment that President Trump was elected for.” But he had warned of a potential MAGA divide over Iran.

Days later, Kirk said that “Trump voters, especially young people, supported President Trump because he was the first president in my lifetime to not start a new war.” He also wrote that “there is historically little support for America to be actively engaged in yet another offensive war in the Middle East. We must work for and pray for peace.”

In Kirk’s view, “The last thing America needs right now is a new war. Our number one desire must be peace, as quickly as possible.”

Kinnard writes for the Associated Press.

Reporting from Washington — At the center of his foreign policy vision, Donald Trump has put “America First,” a phrase with an anti-Semitic and isolationist history going back to the years before the U.S. entry into World War II.

Trump started using the slogan in the later months of his campaign, and despite requests from the Anti-Defamation League that he drop it, he stuck with it.

Friday, he embraced the words as a unifying theme for his inaugural address.

“From this day forward, a new vision will govern our land,” Trump said on the Capitol steps. “From this day forward, it’s going to be only America First. America First.”

Those same words galvanized a mass populist movement against U.S. entry into the war in Europe, even as the German army rolled through France and Belgium in the spring of 1940.

A broad-based coalition of politicians and business leaders on the right and left came together as the America First Committee to oppose President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s support for France and Great Britain. The movement grew to more than 800,000 members.

While the America First Committee attracted a wide array of support, the movement was marred by anti-Semitic and pro-fascist rhetoric. Its highest profile spokesman, Charles Lindbergh, blamed American Jews for pushing the country into war.

“The British and the Jewish races,” he said at a rally in September 1941, “for reasons which are not American, wish to involve us in the war.”

The “greatest danger” Jews posed to the U.S. “lies in their large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio, and our government,” Lindbergh said.

It is unclear if Trump is bothered by the ugly history of the phrase. What is clear is that he is determined to make the words his own. He has used them to sell his promises to impose trade barriers, keep manufacturing jobs inside the U.S. and restrict illegal and legal immigration.

Inauguration Day live updates: ‘American carnage stops’ here and now, Trump says »

“Every decision on trade, on taxes, on immigration, on foreign affairs, will be made to benefit American workers and American families,” Trump said in Friday’s inaugural speech.

“We must protect our borders from the ravages of other countries making our products, stealing our companies, and destroying our jobs,” he said.

“It is such a toxic phrase with such a putrid history,” said Susan Dunn, professor of humanities at Williams College and an expert in American political history, in an interview.

Lindbergh and other prominent members of the America First organization believed democracy was in decline and that fascism represented a new future, Dunn said.

Those words “carry an enormous weight,” said Lynne Olson, author of “Those Angry Days,” a book about the clash between Lindbergh and Roosevelt over entering the war.

“That time was strikingly familiar to now,” Olson said. “There was an enormous amount of economic and social turmoil in the country, anti-Semitism rose dramatically as well as general nativism and populism.”

Shortly after Trump took the oath of office, White House aides posted a 500-word description of Trump’s approach to the world titled “America First Foreign Policy.”

“The world must know that we do not go abroad in search of enemies, that we are always happy when old enemies become friends, and when old friends become allies,” the statement read. It added that defeating radical Islamic terror groups will be the “highest priority,” and that Trump’s administration would add ships to the Navy and build the Air Force back up to Cold War levels.

Trump also plans to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership and renegotiate the terms of NAFTA with Canada and Mexico.

Trump appears to have first tried out the phrase “America First” during an interview with the New York Times in March, when he was asked if he was taking an isolationist, “America First” approach to foreign policy.

“Not isolationist, I’m not isolationist, but I am ‘America First.’ So I like the expression. I’m ‘America First,’” Trump said at the time. “We have been disrespected, mocked and ripped off for many, many years by people that were smarter, shrewder, tougher,” he added.

Twitter: @ByBrianBennett

[email protected]

ALSO

Dozens of protesters arrested as violence breaks out in capital

Trump is sworn in as president and promises to lift up ‘the forgotten’

Just like his campaign, Trump’s inauguration breaks Washington norms