From Genesis to genocide, American right-wing battle over unwavering support for Israel

 A combative interview between conservative American commentator Tucker Carlson and US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee has exposed a widening ideological divide within the American right over Washington’s unwavering support for Israel. The two-and-a-half-hour exchange, recorded at Ben Gurion Airport in Israel, ranged from biblical claims to territory and the war in Gaza to allegations of dual loyalty and disputes over Israel’s treatment of Christians, culminating in a public spat over Carlson’s treatment at the airport.

At the heart of the clash was Huckabee’s assertion that Israel has a “Biblical right” to the land. Citing the Book of Genesis, Carlson pressed the ambassador on the territory promised to Abraham’s descendants, traditionally described as stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates and encompassing present-day Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and parts of Iraq and Saudi Arabia. When asked whether Israel would be justified in taking control of that entire expanse, Huckabee replied, “It would be fine if they took it all,” before adding that the current Israeli government was not seeking to expand to those ancient borders. For Carlson, the remark illustrated what he sees as an absolutist theological framework driving US policy. For Huckabee, it reflected a long-standing evangelical Christian Zionist belief that biblical covenants underpin Jewish claims to the land.

The conversation grew especially heated over the humanitarian toll in Gaza. Huckabee defended Israel, contending that the Israeli military has maintained a lower proportion of civilian casualties in urban warfare than any army in modern history, including the United States. Carlson bristled at the comparison, accusing Huckabee of disparaging his own country’s armed forces to defend Israel. When pressed for precise data, the ambassador conceded he did not have exact figures, saying his assessment was based on conversations with those who had fought there.

Tensions escalated further when Huckabee suggested that some of the 14-year-olds killed were “terror kids” recruited by Hamas. Carlson reacted with disbelief, accusing the ambassador of justifying the killing of children. Huckabee shot back that his words were being twisted. The exchange underscored a fundamental disagreement over how to interpret civilian casualties in asymmetric warfare and whether moral responsibility lies primarily with Israel or with Hamas for embedding fighters among civilians.

Carlson also raised Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s invocation of the biblical Amalekites early in the war, arguing that such rhetoric amounted to a call for genocide. Huckabee rejected the characterisation outright, asserting that if Israel’s objective had been genocide, it possessed the military capacity to “wipe out Gaza in hours”. The dispute reflected a broader argument over language, intent and proportionality that has defined much of the international debate surrounding the conflict.

A recurring theme throughout the interview was Carlson’s allegation that US officials behave as though they serve Israeli interests over American ones. He confronted Huckabee over his decision to host Jonathan Pollard at the US Embassy. Pollard, an American who served 30 years in prison for passing US military secrets to Israel, remains a deeply polarising figure. Carlson described him as “the greatest traitor in modern American history” and questioned why an American ambassador would meet him. Huckabee defended the brief meeting as neither secret nor improper and said he did not regret it. At one point, pushing back against insinuations of dual loyalty, Huckabee gestured to his lapel and asked pointedly, “What flag am I wearing here?”

Carlson broadened his critique to Israel’s domestic policies and social tensions. He cited incidents of ultra-Orthodox Jews spitting on Christian clergy in Jerusalem and asked why the United States should offer unconditional support to a country that, in his words, mistreats Christians, funds abortion services and provides refuge to American fugitives accused of sex crimes. Huckabee condemned harassment of Christians as “horrible” but noted he had never personally experienced such abuse in decades of visits. He clarified that US aid is earmarked for military defence rather than healthcare and said he would support extradition of accused offenders if instructed by Washington.

Carlson also questioned the historical and indigenous claims of Israeli leaders, observing that many have family roots in Eastern Europe, while Palestinian families trace their presence in the Levant back centuries. Huckabee dismissed genetic or geographic arguments as beside the point, insisting that archaeological evidence and biblical tradition establish a continuous Jewish connection to the land. The two men sparred over Iran as well. Carlson accused Netanyahu of manoeuvring the United States towards regime change in Tehran, while Huckabee argued that Iran’s sponsorship of militant groups and alleged plots against former president Donald Trump make it an inherent adversary of America.

If the interview exposed ideological fault lines, the aftermath added a fresh layer of controversy. Carlson later claimed that Israeli airport security confiscated his passport and took his executive producer into a side room for questioning about the interview. Israeli officials, including the Foreign Ministry and airport authorities, denied the allegation, saying Carlson’s team underwent routine security screening in a VIP lounge to protect their privacy. Video footage subsequently circulated showing a smiling Carlson posing for a photograph with an airport employee, while former prime minister Naftali Bennett dismissed the episode as fabrication.

The confrontation laid bare a growing schism within conservative politics. On one side stand traditional evangelical Christian Zionists like by Huckabee, who view support for Israel as both strategic and divinely ordained. On the other is an ascendant “America First” faction, represented by people like Carlson, which questions the costs of entanglement and argues that US leaders have subordinated national interests to those of a foreign ally. The debate, once largely confined to the fringes of the Republican coalition, is now unfolding in full public view.