The Iran crisis has become more than another confrontation in the Middle East. For America First, it is a test of a political promise: Can the United States break from the cycle of endless wars, reserve its power for clear national interests, and resist turning every foreign crisis into another open-ended American commitment?

That question goes to the heart of what America First was supposed to change.

For its supporters, America First has never meant abandoning American power or retreating from the world. It means asking harder questions about how that power is used and for what purpose. Must every regional threat become a test of American credibility? Must every crisis lead to a larger military commitment? Or is American strength better preserved when Washington knows not only when to act, but when not to become trapped in another conflict with no clear end?

The experience of the past two decades gave that argument its political force.

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq began with promises of greater security but became symbols of enormous human, financial, and strategic costs. For many Americans, they raised a basic question: Did prolonged overseas interventions actually serve the direct interests of the United States?

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq began with promises of greater security but became symbols of enormous human, financial, and strategic costs. For many Americans, they raised a basic question: Did prolonged overseas interventions actually serve the direct interests of the United States?

From that experience came one of the central promises associated with America First: ending endless wars.

That promise did not mean giving up American military strength. It meant using that strength more selectively, with clearer objectives and greater restraint. But the Iran crisis has exposed a deeper challenge. The greatest obstacle to America First may not be abroad. It may be inside Washington itself.

Washington........

© Middle East Monitor