Lead
On 20 February 2026, US ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee told podcaster Tucker Carlson in an interview recorded in Israel that it “would be fine” if Israel took control of the territory described in an Old Testament promise to Abraham, a phrase Carlson said would cover much of the modern Middle East. The remark framed territorial claims in explicitly biblical terms and was made while the two discussed scripture and Christian nationalist interpretations. The interview drew immediate attention because it combined a high-profile US envoy’s public theological assertion with wider controversy over Carlson’s account of being detained at Ben Gurion airport. Israeli and US officials later said Carlson underwent routine security questioning and was not detained.
Key Takeaways
- Mike Huckabee, serving as US ambassador to Israel, said on an interview posted 20 February 2026 that “it would be fine if they took it all,” referring to territory cited in Genesis as promised to Abraham.
- Tucker Carlson characterized the biblical description as covering “basically the entire Middle East,” including Israel, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and parts of Saudi Arabia and Iraq.
- The exchange was recorded in Israel; Carlson had earlier claimed he faced unusual treatment at Ben Gurion airport, a claim Israeli and US officials have disputed.
- The Israel Airports Authority stated that Carlson and his entourage were not detained, delayed, or interrogated, describing the encounter as routine security questioning.
- Huckabee’s statement reflects a religiously based interpretation rather than an official change in US territorial policy; State Department officials have not announced any policy shift.
- Former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett publicly criticized Carlson’s credibility after Carlson’s airport claims, while Huckabee defended routine security procedures.
Background
The interview appears amid ongoing tensions around US political support for Israel and a broader debate within parts of American conservatism over how religious scripture should influence policy. Within the US Christian nationalist movement, some leaders interpret passages from Genesis—specifically God’s promise to Abraham referencing land “from the wadi of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates”—as a divine territorial grant. Those readings vary widely in scope and political application, and they are not consistently accepted by mainstream international law scholars or by many Israeli and Palestinian political actors.
Mike Huckabee, a former Arkansas governor and Trump administration appointee, has long been seen as aligned with evangelical pro-Israel constituencies; Tucker Carlson is a media figure whose stance toward Israel has shifted in recent months. Carlson’s claim that he was detained at Ben Gurion airport generated headlines and prompted responses from Israeli officials; the Israel Airports Authority posted a statement denying any detention or interrogation. The exchange thus combined theological argument, media spectacle and diplomatic visibility in one high-profile encounter.
Main Event
The interview, posted online on Friday, focused on scriptural passages and their contemporary interpretation. Carlson quoted the Genesis verse listing peoples and a territorial description extending to the Euphrates and suggested that, in modern mapping, the phrase would encompass essentially the whole Middle East. Huckabee answered that he was “not sure it would go that far,” but added that it would still amount to “a big piece of land” and later said “it would be fine if they took it all.” Those short remarks became the focal point of subsequent coverage.
Carlson had earlier said he experienced “bizarre” treatment at Ben Gurion airport; Israeli and US officials quickly responded, saying he was subject to routine passport and security checks. Huckabee himself posted on X that everyone who enters or leaves Israel is routinely asked security questions, a point echoed by the Israel Airports Authority. The public back-and-forth blurred lines between the conduct of visitors at ports of entry and the interview’s broader theological claims.
Responses inside Israel were mixed. Former prime minister Naftali Bennett criticized Carlson for his airport claims and questioned Carlson’s authority to speak about Israel. Proponents of a maximalist biblical reading welcomed Huckabee’s phrasing as sympathetic, while many analysts stressed that a religious text does not translate into recognized international borders or immediate diplomatic action by states.
Analysis & Implications
Huckabee’s statement amplifies a theological rationale for territorial claims but does not amount to a legal or policy declaration by the United States. International borders are governed by treaties, customary international law, and diplomatic negotiations; a religious interpretation voiced by an ambassador complicates diplomatic signaling but does not legally alter boundaries. US foreign policy typically separates personal religious views of officials from formal state positions, and there has been no authoritative announcement that Washington endorses territorial expansion based on scripture.
Domestically in the United States, the exchange highlights divisions within conservative and pro-Israel constituencies. Carlson’s prominence and ideological drift have moved him away from some mainstream Republican circles; Huckabee’s comments align more with longstanding evangelical support for Israel but sit uneasily with international norms. Politically, the episode could energize both hardline supporters who favor maximal territorial readings and critics who view such arguments as destabilizing or unrealistic.
Regionally, invoking biblical promises as justification for territorial claims risks inflaming an already fraught environment. Arab states, Palestinian leaders, and many international actors view territorial arrangements through the lenses of sovereignty, negotiated settlement, and human rights. A public suggestion—even framed theologically—that Israel could take vast swathes of neighboring territory is likely to be met with alarm and condemnation from actors who interpret such comments as legitimizing expansion at the expense of neighboring states and civilians.
Comparison & Data
| Phrase (Genesis) | Approximate modern territory referenced |
|---|---|
| “From the wadi of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates” | Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, parts of southern Turkey, and areas of Iraq and Saudi Arabia |
The Genesis description spans territory that overlaps several modern states and is not directly mappable to contemporary borders. Religious geographies and political boundaries follow different logics: scripture offers symbolic and theological claims, while state borders are fixed by treaties and recognized by the international community. Analysts caution against equating scriptural language with precise cartography or legal entitlement.
Reactions & Quotes
Officials and public figures responded quickly, providing divergent takes that reflect political and ideological fault lines.
“It would be fine if they took it all.”
Mike Huckabee, US ambassador to Israel
This quote was the interview’s most widely reported line; Huckabee framed it as part of a discussion about scripture and a historical-religious claim rather than as a policy blueprint.
“Like, basically the entire Middle East.”
Tucker Carlson, podcaster and interviewer
Carlson used this phrasing to emphasize the geographic breadth of the biblical passage under discussion, linking ancient text to modern borders in stark terms during the interview.
“Next time he talks about Israel as if he’s some expert, just remember this guy is a phony!”
Naftali Bennett, former Israeli prime minister (post on X)
Bennett’s blunt response targeted Carlson’s credibility after the airport incident and underscored internal Israeli sensitivity to how outsiders portray the country.
Unconfirmed
- Carlson’s claim that he was “detained” at Ben Gurion airport is disputed; Israeli and US officials characterize his experience as routine security questioning and the Israel Airports Authority said he was not detained.
- That Genesis’ territorial description confers a contemporary, legally enforceable right to land for any state is an interpretive claim and not accepted as a matter of international law.
- There is no confirmed change in US policy indicating Washington endorses territorial expansion based on religious texts; no official State Department directive was issued accompanying Huckabee’s remarks.
Bottom Line
Mike Huckabee’s televised remark that it “would be fine” if Israel took the lands described in Genesis has amplified a longstanding debate about the role of religious narrative in shaping political rhetoric. While the comment reverberated in headlines, it remains a personal and theological assertion rather than a binding policy pronouncement by the United States. Observers should distinguish between rhetorical, faith-based positions and the complex legal and diplomatic processes that determine international borders.
Going forward, the episode is likely to prompt renewed scrutiny of how US officials’ personal beliefs intersect with diplomacy, to provoke reactions across the region, and to intensify domestic discussions among American conservatives about the public role of religious argument in foreign policy. The immediate practical effect appears limited, but the political and symbolic consequences could be significant depending on how other officials and states respond.