When did Tucker Carlson first criticize U.S. support for Israel?

Executive Summary — Short Answer, Big Picture

Tucker Carlson’s earliest documented public critique of elements of the U.S.–Israel relationship in the assembled record appears in a piece dated in the dataset to 2017, when he publicly criticized Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer’s conduct; this predates later, more explicit public questioning of broad U.S. support that appears in sources from 2021, 2023 and intensifies in 2025. Carlson’s rhetoric evolved from targeting specific actors or policies to openly questioning the strategic value of U.S. backing for Israel, and the most pronounced, controversial statements in the supplied material come in 2025 interviews where he frames the relationship as costly to the United States ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]}.

1. A first public rebuke that read like policy critique — what the earliest record shows

The earliest item in the provided collection that reads as criticism tied to the U.S.–Israel relationship is a published piece in the dataset dated March 2, 2017, summarizing Carlson’s remarks attacking Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer for actions that allegedly strained U.S.–Israel ties; that coverage frames Carlson’s comments as a complaint about diplomatic behavior and political consequences, not an explicit repudiation of U.S. support for Israel’s existence or security ^[1]. The reporting characterizes the remarks as reactive to a high-profile diplomatic episode—Netanyahu’s congressional visit—and presents Carlson’s critique in the context of U.S. political sensitivities rather than as an ideological break with the pro‑Israel consensus. This earliest item therefore documents Carlson criticizing an Israeli representative and the handling of bilateral interactions, which is an important distinction from later, more sweeping criticisms.

2. Shifting from targeted criticism to policy comparison — 2021 signals a widening critique

By 2021, the record shows Carlson broadening his critiques into comparisons of domestic policy and U.S.–Israeli practices; a Jerusalem Post item describes Carlson taking aim at American Jewish organizations and Israeli immigration policy in ways that critics said echoed white‑supremacist talking points, while Carlson denied racial intent ^[2]. The tone shifts from rebuking an ambassador’s tactics to questioning values and policy equivalencies, and the controversy triggered pushback from Jewish groups, illustrating how Carlson’s comments were being read as part of a wider cultural and political argument rather than merely a discrete foreign‑policy observation. This represents a move from incident-specific commentary to framing Israel-related topics within domestic political debates.

3. Post‑Fox evolution: sharper targeting of pro‑Israel figures and priorities in 2023

After his April 2023 Fox News exit, Carlson’s public rhetoric, as captured in December 2023 reporting, shows him criticizing high‑profile pro‑Israel figures for prioritizing foreign issues over U.S. domestic problems, asserting that some pro‑Israel voices “don’t care about America.” The coverage records strong pushback from former U.S. officials who defended those figures as patriots, and frames Carlson’s line as recasting support for Israel as a possible betrayal of American interests, intensifying the policy‑first critique into a value judgment about political priorities ^[3]. This development marks an evolution from policy disagreement to asserting motive and priority, provoking both ideological pushback and concerns about the rhetoric’s implications.

4. 2025: open alignment with voices that explicitly question U.S. support — peak controversy

In 2025 the supplied sources document Carlson engaging with far‑right interlocutors and publicly stating that questioning the U.S.–Israel relationship is justified because it allegedly “hurts the US” and yields no benefit, with explicit denunciations of Christian Zionists and repeated references to a need to reassess the bilateral tie ^{[5] [4] [6]}. Coverage in June through November 2025 highlights both Carlson’s amplified skepticism and the political fallout: accusations of antisemitism from opponents, claims by allies that he’s voicing a burgeoning paleoconservative strand, and commentators warning the comments reflect a longer‑running, ideologically driven critique of conventional conservative foreign policy ^{[4] [5]}. The 2025 reporting is the most explicit in portraying Carlson as not merely critiquing tactics but challenging the strategic foundations of U.S. support.

5. How to reconcile earliest date with later intensity — contested continuum, not a single flashpoint

The assembled record shows a continuum rather than a single “first” moment: the earliest documented critique in this set centers on a 2017 attack on an Israeli ambassador’s actions, while later years ^{[7] [8] [9]} show progressively broader and more direct challenges to U.S. support for Israel, culminating in 2025 interviews that make the strategic challenge explicit (p