Joe Kent, director of the US National Counterterrorism Center, has become the first senior official under Donald Trump to resign over the war with Iran. He stepped down on Tuesday, stating that Iran did not pose an immediate threat to the United States—a claim that has been strongly disputed by experts and government officials.
In his resignation, Kent argued that there was no urgent danger to the US, contradicting long-standing intelligence assessments. His position quickly faced criticism from senior figures, who insisted that Iran remains a significant threat.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the administration’s actions, saying President Trump had sufficient evidence to justify military strikes and describing Iran as the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism.
House Speaker Mike Johnson rejected Kent’s claims, stating that Kent was not present for key intelligence briefings. He argued that delaying action could have resulted in large-scale casualties.
Similarly, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard dismissed Kent’s position, reaffirming that the administration views Iran as a real and active threat.
Kent explained that he resigned because he could not support the war on moral grounds, suggesting it was influenced more by pressure from Israel and its allies in the US than by urgent security needs.
Following his resignation, Trump criticized Kent, calling his departure beneficial and labeling him as weak on national security.
Analysts also challenged Kent’s stance, noting that US officials have repeatedly warned about Iran’s military and nuclear capabilities, including its missile program and enriched uranium stockpile. These concerns, they say, support the view that Iran poses an ongoing threat, even if the immediacy of that threat is debated.
Additionally, US agencies have warned of possible retaliation, including cyber attacks, drone strikes, and proxy operations. Reports have even highlighted concerns about potential threats to the US mainland.
Kent’s remarks have also drawn emotional responses from individuals affected by Iran-linked violence, with some accusing him of downplaying the long-standing dangers posed by Iranian-backed groups.
