Joe Kent, Director of the United States (US) National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), resigned on March 17, 2026. Established in 2004 based on the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, the NCTC is a central intelligence infrastructure that coordinates the counter-terrorism efforts of 16 federal intelligence agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the National Security Agency (NSA), the Department of Defense, and the Department of Homeland Security, at a centralized level. It has extensive intelligence access and integration authority within the framework of inter-agency data sharing.[1]
The resignation in question can be interpreted as the most serious internal opposition signal regarding the Trump administration’s military operation against Iran. Indeed, on this occasion, Kent, in his resignation letter, claimed that Iran does not pose a close threat to the US and that the war was initiated directly under the pressure of pro-Israel lobbies in Israel and the US.[2] Kent’s resignation can be seen not only as a tension in the intelligence-politics relationship but also as part of a broader transformation in American foreign policy, where institutional mechanisms are increasingly being “bypassed” by a narrow political circle.
Joe Kent is not an ordinary bureaucrat. He is a former Special Forces officer and CIA paramilitary operations officer who has served in conflict zones 11 times. His wife, Shannon Kent, lost her life during an operation against ISIS in the city of Manbij, Syria, in 2019. Kent’s Senate confirmation process had gone thru a politically charged line, with the opposing faction opposing him on the grounds of alleged connections with far-right circles.[3] However, statements from the same opposition faction following the resignation have acknowledged that there is no credible evidence of Iran being an imminent threat.[4] Even those who opposed Kent for political reasons found him justified in the intelligence assessment. Within the security bureaucracy, the fact that the person at the very top of intelligence has officially stated, “We went to war for Israel,” elevates the situation to a different level.
Kent’s resignation letter is shaped around three main claims: that Iran does not pose a close threat to the U.S.; that the war was initiated under the pressure of Israel and the “strong American lobby”; and that this is the same tactic used in the 2003 Iraq War. The explicit expression of these assessments from the upper levels of the institutional hierarchy gives a different weight to the current situation.
Shortly before the war began, claims emerged in open sources that Iran offered certain concessions regarding its nuclear program during talks mediated by Oman in Geneva, and that the possibility of a diplomatic solution had not been completely eliminated.[5] The fact that the negotiations were conducted at a political representation level by then-U.S. President Donald Trump’s Special Representative Steve Witkoff and his son-in-law Jared Kushner, instead of the U.S. technical team, indicates that the process was shaped within a more limited political circle rather than thru institutional expertise.
One of the most vocal opponents of the war, Tucker Carlson, claimed in a video he published on March 14 that he was targeted by the CIA for allegedly having contacts with Iran. Appointed by Donald Trump and having the opportunity to appear on major national channels as one of the highest-ranking figures in the intelligence hierarchy after his resignation, Kent’s choice to convey his statements thru an interview with Tucker Carlson is a communication strategy aimed at directly and controllably reaching an audience aligned with the same viewpoint. In the interview he gave, Kent stated that the NCTC did not have the opportunity to provide the president with a “healthy briefing”; he claimed that the war was influenced more by Israel’s security priorities than by the direct security needs of the United States. In this context, he stated that the approach toward Iran has shifted from the threshold of “cannot acquire nuclear weapons” to the level of “cannot enrich at all.” He also implied that Israeli officials were actively involved in the process and influenced the direction of the discussion in favor of Israel.
Kent made assessments regarding the investigation process into Kirk’s killing and argued that certain elements—particularly foreign connections—had not been sufficiently examined. In this process, the FBI transferring the file to local units and the same institution initiating a review into Kent as well reveal a new dimension regarding how anti-war positions are handled at the institutional level. Considering that Kent became the focus of this review following the interview, together with Carlson’s allegations against him, these developments are expected to gain greater visibility in the coming period.[6]
This process demonstrates that the war is not only a matter of foreign policy but also reshapes the identity definition of the American right. Marjorie Taylor Greene, an ultra-right former Representative and one of the leading figures of the MAGA Movement, stating “Make America Great Again should have meant America First, not Israel First,” shows that this divergence is not limited to media figures but is also deepening among the movement’s political elites.[7]
Amid all these debates, an unexpected statement came from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on March 19, 2026. Netanyahu rejected claims that Israel had dragged the United States into war, saying, “No one can tell Donald Trump what to do.” While this statement aims to convey the message that there is no disagreement between the two allies, it also indirectly confirms the existence of such an accusation. Netanyahu’s emphasis that “no one can make Trump do anything” clearly reveals his dependence on Trump and his need for his political legitimacy.
As a result, Joe Kent’s resignation reveals the existence of a trend indicating the exclusion of intelligence, security, and diplomatic bureaucracy from the American decision-making process. When the exclusion of technical staff prior to the intervention against Iran and their inability to provide sound briefings to the presidency are considered together, it becomes clear that the gap between intelligence and political decision-making processes has widened and that the decision-making mechanism has become concentrated within a narrow political circle. The exclusion of institutions such as the NCTC from the decision-making process not only affects the nature of immediate decisions; it also removes from the system the decades-spanning analytical reflexes and institutional memory of field and regional experts. While the effects of this situation limit the role of the security bureaucracy in policy production, they erode the United States’ strategic consistency and weaken its credibility in the eyes of its allies. This picture is reshaping the global security architecture.
[1] U.S. Government Publishing Office, 2004; “National Counterterrorism Center”, Office of the Director of National Intelligence
[2] Bernd Debusmann Jr, “Top US counterterrorism official resigns over Iran war and urges Trump to reverse course”, BBC News, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cg4g66r3z40o, (Date Accessed: 23.03.2026).
[3] Eric Schmitt, “Senate Approves Trump’s Pick for Top Counterterrorism Post”, The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/30/us/politics/joe-kent-counterterrorism-center.html, (Date Accessed: 23.03.2026).
[4] “Netanyahu’s remarks on Trump”, Associated Press, https://apnews.com, (Date Accessed: 20.03.2026)
[5] “Simon Tisdall, Behind the bombast, Trump will be worried”, The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/mar/20/donald-trump-war-iran-president-power, (Date Accessed: 20.03.2026).
[6] “Joe Kent suggests ‘foreign ties’ in Charlie Kirk killing not fully investigated”, Newsweek, https://www.newsweek.com/foreign-ties-in-kirk-killing-not-fully-investigated-ex-trump-aide-11713540, (Date Accessed: 23.03.2026).
[7] “Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Interview with Megyn Kelly”, The Independent, https://www.independent.co.uk, (Date Accessed: 20.03.2026).
