WASHINGTON — The United States ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, ignited a sweeping diplomatic backlash across the Arab world on Friday after telling conservative commentator Tucker Carlson that it would be "fine" if Israel were to claim and control much of the Middle East, a position he rooted in a biblical reading of divine land grants recorded in the book of Genesis. The comments drew immediate and formal condemnations from multiple Arab governments within hours of the interview's broadcast, while neither the State Department nor the White House had issued any official response by the afternoon of Saturday, February 21.

A Provocative Exchange on Live Broadcast

The remarks emerged during a wide-ranging interview on Carlson's podcast, which aired on Friday, February 20. Carlson pressed Huckabee specifically about his interpretation of Genesis 15, a passage that describes God promising Abraham and his descendants territory stretching from the Nile River in Egypt to the Euphrates River in Iraq. That biblical corridor would encompass modern-day Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, large portions of Saudi Arabia, and Iraq in addition to present-day Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. Carlson characterized the geographic scope as "basically the entire Middle East."

When Carlson asked directly whether Israel had a right to all that land, Huckabee initially hesitated. "Not sure we'd go that far," he said. "It would be a big piece of land." Carlson pressed again, and Huckabee replied: "It would be fine if they took it all." He then added almost immediately that Israel was not seeking to expand its territory and had a right to security within the land it currently occupies. Despite that qualification, the damage to diplomatic sensibilities in the region was effectively immediate.

Later in the same interview, Huckabee appeared to soften his position, describing his earlier statement as "somewhat of a hyperbolic statement." He also said that if Israel were attacked by neighboring states and won such a conflict, territorial changes would become "a whole other discussion," a remark that introduced a conditional endorsement of expansion which did little to quell the alarm spreading across foreign ministries throughout the Arab world.

A Cascade of Regional Condemnation

The reaction from Arab governments was swift and nearly uniform in its severity. Saudi Arabia's foreign ministry described the comments as "extremist rhetoric" and "unacceptable," and formally called on the United States Department of State to clarify Washington's official position on the matter. Egypt's Ministry of Foreign Affairs characterized the remarks as a "blatant violation" of international law, stating that Israel has no sovereignty over occupied Palestinian territory or other Arab lands. Jordan issued its own condemnation, as did the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation and the League of Arab States, which said in a statement that remarks of that nature serve only to "inflame sentiments and stir religious and national emotions," adding that they were "extremist and lacking any sound basis."

Neither the State Department nor the Israeli government had issued an official response as of the close of business on February 21. Secretary of State Marco Rubio's office did not respond to requests for comment from major international media organizations, leaving regional governments without formal clarification of whether Huckabee's views represent any strand of official U.S. foreign policy or constitute a personal theological position expressed publicly by a sitting ambassador. That absence of a swift rebuttal was itself read by foreign policy analysts as a permissive signal.

The diplomatic fallout arrives at a moment of acute fragility across the region. The United States has been managing a complex set of competing interests: a fragile ceasefire agreement in Gaza, military posture adjustments following the removal of Syrian President Bashar Assad from power in late 2024, and unresolved questions about the future governance of the occupied Palestinian territories. For Arab governments that have either signed normalization agreements with Israel or are exploring them, the ambassador's statement introduces a destabilizing element into already delicate processes.

Huckabee, a Baptist minister and longtime conservative political figure, was nominated by President Donald Trump in late 2024 and has consistently positioned himself as an avowed Christian Zionist and an outspoken opponent of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. His views on the region have at times clashed with mainstream diplomatic convention. In 2008, he publicly questioned Palestinian identity, stating on record that "There's really no such thing as a Palestinian," a remark that drew significant condemnation at the time and has since been cited repeatedly as context for his conduct in his current role.

In June 2025, Huckabee told journalists from a major financial outlet that a Palestinian state in the occupied West Bank was no longer a goal of U.S. foreign policy, adding that Israel's neighboring Arab states could provide land to accommodate Palestinian aspirations. That comment was not formally contradicted or walked back by the State Department at the time. The pattern of provocative declarations followed by partial retreats has become a recurring feature of his public statements since taking up the ambassadorship.

His most recent remarks now raise pointed questions about the degree of latitude that ambassadors under the current administration are afforded to articulate geopolitical positions, whether theological or otherwise, that stretch well beyond established policy parameters. They also raise questions about accountability mechanisms when a sitting diplomat's words trigger formal diplomatic protests from multiple sovereign governments in one of the world's most strategically sensitive regions.

Territorial Realities on the Ground

Any discussion of Israeli territorial rights must be understood against a factual backdrop that has grown considerably more complex since the October 2023 outbreak of the Gaza war. Israel encroached on additional territory during the conflict, and under the current ceasefire agreement its forces withdrew to a buffer zone while still controlling more than half of the Gaza Strip. The ceasefire agreement does not specify a timeline for further withdrawal, according to reporting by major international outlets covering the negotiations.

Israel has occupied the Golan Heights since the 1967 Mideast war and formally annexed the territory in 1981, a move broadly regarded as a violation of international law. The United States became the only country to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights in 2019, during Trump's first term. Following Assad's removal from power at the end of 2024, Israeli forces moved into a previously demilitarized buffer zone in Syria established under a 1974 ceasefire, a move the Israeli government described as temporary and defensive. Israel also maintains five military outposts on Lebanese soil, a direct consequence of its 2024 conflict with Hezbollah.

In 2024, the International Court of Justice ruled that Israel's ongoing occupation of Palestinian territory is illegal under international law and must end immediately. Israel's domestic law does not clearly define the country's official borders, a legal ambiguity that critics of the current administration argue creates space for the kind of expansionist theological framing that Huckabee advanced on the Carlson broadcast.

Policy Implications and the Road Ahead

The geopolitical consequences of Huckabee's remarks extend far beyond the immediate round of diplomatic protests. For Arab states engaged in normalization discussions with Israel, processes that the United States has actively encouraged, the ambassador's statement injects a deeply toxic element into carefully managed negotiations. Saudi Arabia, which has been in extended discussions with Washington about a potential normalization deal with Israel, now faces internal political pressure to demonstrate a harder posture, particularly given that the biblical territory Huckabee described explicitly encompasses large swaths of the kingdom's own land.

The remarks also complicate American diplomatic credibility in a region where longstanding perceptions of bias have functioned as a persistent barrier to U.S. influence. Whether or not Huckabee's statement is formally disavowed by the State Department, the failure to issue a swift public rebuttal functions as a signal to regional governments about the current administration's operational tolerance for expansionist rhetoric from its own senior diplomatic personnel. That signal, analysts noted, will not be easily walked back regardless of what official statement eventually emerges.

Huckabee has shown no indication of retreating further from the substance of his views. His career, from serving as governor of Arkansas to running for president on two occasions to his current role in Jerusalem, has been defined by an unapologetic fusion of religious conviction and political positioning. Whether that fusion now creates meaningful friction with the diplomatic architecture the United States has spent decades constructing across the Middle East may depend less on what the ambassador says next and more on what the Secretary of State and the White House choose, or decline, to say in the days that follow.

For now, official Washington's silence speaks as loudly as the remarks that produced the crisis.

Written by Nick Ravenshade for NENC Media Group, original article and analysis.