Elbridge Colby, president of President Trump as Pentagon's policy director, faces skepticism from GOP senators about his views on whether to stand up aggressively against Iran and China or leave Europe and Ukraine.
Some Republican senators have threatened to promote a break in Trump's national security agenda by enduring Colby, who has promulgated various controversial or unorthodox policy views, including suggesting that the US can tolerate nuclear-armed Iran.
Colby faced questions from Tom Cotton (R-Ark) and Dan Sullivan (R-Arc) on Tuesday in his confirmation hearing on whether he would allow Iran to become nuclear, and why he “softer” his stance on the US that he had promised to sue Taiwan from all Chinese attacks. Vice President Vance appeared outside the hearing on a show in support of Colby.
“I have some concerns about what you said in the past: whether you want to contain nuclear Iran or whether you had to choose whether a military-powered Iran had to tolerate nuclear Iran and prevent it from gaining a nuclear weapon to which it was meant to contain,” Cotton told the candidate.
“That's certainly not my opinion, but it's more important. It's not President Trump's policy,” Cotton declared frankly.
Colby has promised Trump to offer “reliable and realistic” military options to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Cotton then burned the candidates about why he “softed” his stance by providing security assurances to Taiwan.
“Can you explain why Taiwan's defense seemed a little softer in the last few years?” he asked.
Colby responded that he has always said that Taiwan is “very important” to the United States, but that he insisted that it was “not existential interest.”
He said that US policymakers should rethink the national security interests of protecting Taiwan in a full conflict with China, due to a change in the US-China “military balance.”
Sullivan pushed candidates on whether the US should consider NATO as a useful alliance after his past statements calling for a US pivot away from Europe and Ukraine.
“Are you a strong supporter of the NATO Alliance?” Sullivan asked. “Do you still think it's a useful and important alliance for the United States?”
Colby told the committee: Again, Senator, I believe in NATO very much, but I believe it… has to adapt. ”
He argued that allies like Germany do not align their historic military commitments to European collective defense.
Sullivan immediately stepped in: “I agree with it all, but it's worth reforming because it provides power and strength to the United States.”
Colby has argued in the past that the US lacks economic resources to remain fully committed to the defense of its European and Asian allies, and should focus more on the threat posed by China.
When asked by an Alaska Senator about his acceptance of nuclear-armed Iran, Colby left past statements and explained that “I have been in policy debate for a long time.”
“It's not everything I said,” he said.
The Wall Street Journal wrote in an editorial on Monday that Colby's official statement made him “a lightning bolt of the battle between the wings of the GOP beyond peace and retreat from that world.”
The Journal wrote that Colby “consciously made himself into an intellectual frontman for the wing of political rights that he argued that the US should retreat from its commitment in Europe and the Middle East.”
Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) challenged Colby to see if Michael Dimino was in the role of deputy director of Middle East Defense. Dimino has been vigilant with pro-Israel advocates by arguing that the United States does not actually face any significant or existential threats in the region.
Colby testified that he did not choose Dimino for his job, claiming that it did not reflect Trump's policies in the Middle East.
Wicker also challenged Colby to see if he agreed with Andrew Byers, deputy defense secretary for South and Southeast Asia, according to GOP Senators.
Colby said these statements did not reflect his views.
Colby insists on Wicker that the collapse of Taiwan to China is a “disaster for American interests,” but that the “military balance” between the US and China has “deteriorately deteriorated.”
“The analogy I want to use is Winston Churchill from 1940. I want to send Spitfire and the Hurricane to the battle of France, but Mrs. Dowding said, “If I do that, I won't be able to protect my hometown island,” Colby said.
The answer is, “How long will it take to prepare?”
The candidate said: “Trying to prepare as soon as possible will be one of our top priorities.
Wicker told CQ Roll Call last month that Colby's past views have been “concerns for many senators,” but declined to comment on the candidate on Tuesday.
Some Republican senators have personally said they will try to beat lower Trump candidates after recognizing the president's respect for cabinet-level candidates.
Where cotton can finally determine if the land is Colby confirmed.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (SC), a well-known Republican voice on defense, told Hill on Tuesday that he would “talk with cotton” about the candidate.
Colby could also encounter opposition from Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY.). He repeatedly argued that the United States has important national security concerns in providing effective deterrent to Russia, China, Iran and North Korea.
Written in the January-February edition of the Foreign Affairs edition, McConnell forced arguing against prioritizing a single theatre and downgrading US interests and commitments elsewhere.
“The administration faces calls from within the Republican Party and gives up on America's superiority,” he wrote. “To pretend that the US can afford to focus on one threat at a time, or narrow down distant confusion because its reliability is divided or unrelated, is to ignore its global interests and the global design of its enemies.”
