“The Mark Levin Bloc”: Saudis Privately Push Trump for Total Defeat of Tehran
WASHINGTON / RIYADH — A startling divide has emerged within the anti-Iran coalition as the war enters its second month. According to a report by Axios on Wednesday, April 1, 2026, senior advisers to President Donald Trump have described their Saudi counterparts as “extraordinarily hawkish,” with one official remarking that the Saudi leadership “sounds like Mark Levin“—the firebrand American conservative known for advocating a scorched-earth policy against the Iranian regime.
The report reveals that while the Trump administration is actively seeking an “off-ramp” to meet its April 6 deadline, Saudi Arabia is pushing for the U.S. to “wipe the threat off the globe” before any ceasefire is signed.
The “Historic Opportunity” Doctrine
The shift in Saudi rhetoric marks a dramatic departure from the Kingdom’s initial caution at the start of Operation Epic Fury.
- No “Half-Measures”: Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has reportedly told White House officials that ending the war now would be a “strategic failure.” The Saudis argue that unless Iran’s clerical leadership is dismantled and its ballistic missile “cities” are neutralized, the Kingdom will face decades of asymmetrical retaliation once U.S. forces withdraw.
- The “Levin” Comparison: The Axios source noted that the Saudis are now more aggressive than many in the “America First” inner circle. “They aren’t just asking for a better deal; they’re asking for the end of the Islamic Republic as a political entity,” the adviser said.
- Pressure on the “Off-Ramp”: This hawkishness is complicating President Trump’s efforts to finalize a 15-point peace plan. While Trump has stated that “regime change is not the goal,” Riyadh is privately insisting that regime change is the only guarantee of security.
The UAE: The “Most Hawkish” Ally?
While Saudi Arabia provides the ideological push, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) is reportedly the most eager for a ground escalation.
- Ground Invasion Push: Emirati diplomats have conveyed that they are ready to support a ground operation to secure the Iranian coast and the Strait of Hormuz. Having faced over 2,300 missile and drone attacks since February 28, Abu Dhabi views a “kinetic reopening” of the shipping lanes as a survival necessity.
- The “Guarantor” Role: As reported earlier today, the UAE is pushing for a UN Resolution to justify force, offering to lead mine-clearing and coastal security operations—a move that would allow the U.S. to begin its projected 2-3 week withdrawal.
The Strategic Paradox
The irony of the current situation is not lost on Washington. Saudi Arabia—a country that relies on American weapons and hosts U.S. bases—is now the primary advocate for expanding the war, even as the U.S. looks to exit.
| Actor | Current Objective | Stance on Iranian Regime |
| United States | Secure a “Deal” by April 6; Exit by late April | “Not looking for regime change” |
| Saudi Arabia | “Decisive defeat”; Neutralize all proxies | Pushing for total dismantling of the clerical leadership |
| UAE | Reopen Strait of Hormuz via force if necessary | “No longer an acceptable feature of the landscape” |
| Iran (Tehran) | Breaking the blockade; Forcing U.S. exit | Defiant; Waiting for “Ground War” |
Analysis: A Coalition at Odds
The “Mark Levin” comparison underscores a brewing crisis in the alliance. President Trump, who campaigned on ending “forever wars,” now finds himself pressured by his closest regional allies to finish a job he claims is already “practically done.”
For the Saudis and Emiratis, the calculation is simple: they cannot afford to live next door to a “wounded but still venomous” Iran. However, for a White House focused on 9:00 PM ET addresses and domestic “affordability,” the appetite for a total regional overhaul is rapidly vanishing. As the clock ticks toward the April 6 deadline, the question is no longer just how the war ends, but whether the U.S. can leave without alienating the very allies it went to war to protect.