U.S. President Donald Trump’s nominee for under secretary of defense for policy, Elbridge Colby, faced a slew of tough questions on March 4 during his hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee. And not just from Democrats—Republicans, too.
Colby, a prominent realist who has pushed for the United States to prioritize the Indo-Pacific over other regions, has garnered strong support from Vice President J.D. Vance and other prominent figures in Trump’s inner circle. He served in the Defense Department in Trump’s first term and led the drafting of that administration’s National Defense Strategy.
U.S. President Donald Trump’s nominee for under secretary of defense for policy, Elbridge Colby, faced a slew of tough questions on March 4 during his hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee. And not just from Democrats—Republicans, too.
Colby, a prominent realist who has pushed for the United States to prioritize the Indo-Pacific over other regions, has garnered strong support from Vice President J.D. Vance and other prominent figures in Trump’s inner circle. He served in the Defense Department in Trump’s first term and led the drafting of that administration’s National Defense Strategy.
But his nomination has stirred debate within the Republican Party, with traditional defense hawks questioning some of his restraint-oriented positions in recent weeks.
Trump’s nominees haven’t taken much heat from Republicans during their confirmations, but at yesterday’s hearing, several Republican senators questioned Colby over his evolving views on Iran and Taiwan.
Sen. Tom Cotton, one of the Senate’s most ardent hawks, said, “I have some concerns about what you’ve said in the past, namely that if we had to choose between hoping to contain a nuclear Iran and preventing Iran with military force from getting nukes that we should tolerate a nuclear Iran and try to contain it.” Cotton quoted a line from an article Colby wrote for Foreign Policy in 2010, in which he argued that “containing a nuclear Iran is an eminently plausible and practical objective.”
Colby’s response appeared to quell Cotton’s concerns. He said he would give Trump realistic options to use military force to deter Iran from developing nuclear weapons if he was confirmed, aligning with Cotton’s ask.
Cotton also probed Colby on Taiwan, following similar questions from the chairman of the committee, Sen. Roger Wicker, who opened the hearing. Both senators, who are strong supporters of Taiwan, asked Colby to explain why his position has softened over the past decade—from calling for an explicit U.S. security guarantee for Taiwan to less strident statements in recent years.
“I’ve always said that Taiwan is very important to the United States, but as you said, it’s not an existential interest—it’s very important. The core American interest is in denying China regional hegemony,” Colby said, adding that what’s changed is the “dramatic deterioration of the military balance” in the Indo-Pacific. “It’s different to engage in a futile and overly costly effort that would destroy our military.”
But in his response to Wicker’s questions, Colby made it clear that he is still committed to his overall theory of shifting more U.S. resources to the Indo-Pacific to deter a Chinese attack on Taiwan. “It would be essentially my number one or one of my very top priorities, if confirmed, to try to get us prepared as quickly as possible and then over the medium and longer term, as well,” he said, adding that he’d like to see the United States reach a point where its defense industrial base is strong enough to “resource in multiple theaters at the level that we need.” In the interim, he called for Taiwan to also significantly increase its defense spending to 10 percent of GDP, up from 2.5 percent.
The Republican senators appeared to be, at least momentarily, satisfied with Colby’s responses. And they may not have much room for further dissent given Colby’s strong backing in MAGA world. Vance underscored his support for his “friend” by going to Capitol Hill to introduce Colby on Tuesday—a rare hearing appearance for Vance. Last month, Turning Point USA President Charlie Kirk called Cotton out for “working behind the scenes” to prevent Colby from being confirmed, and Vance and Elon Musk chimed in with their own support for Colby.
The friction is reflective of the broader effort from MAGA world to “clip the wings” of the hawks in the Republican Party in favor of a more restraint-minded—and authoritarian friendly—approach to foreign policy. Another example of this is Keith Kellogg, the administration’s special envoy on the Russia-Ukraine war, reportedly getting pushed out of recent negotiations because he was perceived as too pro-Ukraine.
Notably, Colby refused to directly answer questions about whether Russia started the war during his hearing.
Colby did not immediately respond to FP’s request for comment on the hearing.
“In the past, the Republican Party was very hawkish on these issues across the board. So, I must say, if you had asked me 10 years ago if this would be today’s Republican Party, I would be, frankly, very shocked,” Lyle Goldstein, director of Asia engagement at Defense Priorities, a pro-restraint think tank, told FP. “Things are changing, and there’s an earnest debate in the Republican Party.”
As Colby moves through the confirmation process toward his final vote, he will be a key indicator of where the reinvention of the GOP’s foreign policy is heading under Trump, particularly when it comes to debates over Taiwan and China.
“I think he has very powerful backing in the top ranks of the Republican Party and in the Trump administration. So, I do think there could be some sniping on the side. But my assumption is, and has always been, that he will go through,” Goldstein said.
The post Trump’s Pick for Key Pentagon Role Faces Off With GOP Hawks appeared first on Foreign Policy.
