Follow us on social

google cta
Screen-shot-2022-03-31-at-2.58.45-pm

Rand Paul: Promoting negotiations over war doesn't make you a Putin sympathizer

The senator told a friendly audience of conservatives that there is no reason to 'throw out our principal beliefs.'

Analysis | Europe
google cta
google cta

Republican Senator Rand Paul told a friendly audience of conservatives Thursday that he is standing firm on his principles as a constitutional restrainer, and while he thinks Putin's invasion of Ukraine is wrong and unjustified, he does not think that military escalation or regime change policies — or even sanctions with no defined goals — are right.

“If you say you don’t want to get involved in this war … people immediately think you’re on the other side, that you’re sympathetic with the other side," he told the “Up from Chaos” foreign policy conference in Washington. "I have not sympathized with Putin, what he has done is not justified. But that doesn’t mean we throw the baby out with the bathwater and throw out our principle beliefs.” 

We can make it worse for the Ukrainian people with escalation and intervention, he added. “Almost all war ends in negotiation,” he charged. "It doesn’t justify (Putin’s) aggression, but I do think we need to find off ramps and exits even for our enemies.”

Paul also revealed that his brief comments to a reporter a few weeks ago in support of the Iran nuclear deal were hardly a one-off, in fact he has a pretty straightforward view of the situation.

 “Leaving the agreement didn't make anything better,” he said. He needled critics who bemoaned reports that the JCPOA renewal deal may not be as strong as the one that President Trump ripped up in 2018."It’s going to be ‘less for less’ because we rejected ‘more for more,’” he argued. 

He also took a swipe at JCPOA opponents, including his fellow Republicans on the Hill, who have criticized an agreement that has yet to emerge publicly from the tense talks in Vienna. "​​If you are condemning an agreement before you even see it aren't you simply condemning diplomacy?"

Clearly getting out of the deal allowed the Iranians to continue to enrich uranium, he said. Slapping on further “maximum pressure” sanctions and making Iran a pariah in the region didn’t work either,  he said. “There is no evidence that sanctions on Iran did anything.”

This was a rare receptive audience for restraint and non-interventionism in the heart the Washington — even rarer in that it focused on the right, hosting Rep. Thomas Massie, U.S. Senate hopeful J.D. Vance, Rep. Dan Bishop (who said critics complained he “joined the pro-Putin wing of the Republican Party” for questioning “war fever” on the Hill), and Fox News’s Mollie Hemingway. Co-sponsored by American Moment and The American Conservative, topics revolved around the current echo chamber promoting an aggressive posture against Russia, and attempts to silence dissent. 

Paul also said he had a general skepticism for the over-use of sanctions against U.S. adversaries, including Russia. "I don't think we should never use the threat of sanctions ... but...we have hundreds on Russia and China and no one has an idea of how to lift them; they end up having no value at all."


Senator Rand Paul at the 'Up from Chaos' conference in D.C., March 31, 2022. (courtesy of American Moment/Twitter)
google cta
Analysis | Europe
Viktor Orban Peter Magyar
Top photo credit: Viktor Orbán (shutterstock/photoibo) and Peter Magyar (Shutterstock/Istvan Csak)

Could this be the election that brings Hungary's Orban down?

Europe

With two months remaining before the April 12 parliamentary elections, Hungary’s Prime Minister Victor Orban and his Fidesz party face by far their toughest challenge since winning power in 2010.

Many polls show challenger Peter Magyar’s Tisza (Respect and Freedom) party with a substantial lead. Orban’s campaign has responded by stressing his international clout, including close relations with U.S. President Donald Trump, and the prominent role he plays among right-populist Eurosceptics in Europe.

keep readingShow less
Trump hasn't bombed Iran yet. He must be reading these polls.
Top photo credit: Members of the media raise their hands to ask questions as U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (not pictured) hold a joint press conference in the State Dining Room at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., September 29, 2025. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY

Trump hasn't bombed Iran yet. He must be reading these polls.

Middle East

When the George W. Bush administration invaded Iraq in March 2003, that war had 72% support among Americans, according to Gallup.

If Donald Trump now wants to start a U.S. war with Iran, the president would not remotely enjoy that level of support. He doesn’t even have half of it. Scratch that, not even a quarter of Americans want him to bomb Iran today.

keep readingShow less
Us-army-soldiers
Top photo credit: U.S. Army Soldiers, from the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team depart for Afghanistan from Italy on Feb. 25, 2005. (U.S. Air Force Photo by Staff Sgt. Bethann Caporaletti)

Could the US win a war with a near-peer adversary today?

Military Industrial Complex

“One should never assert a power that he cannot exert,” said British statesman and wordsmith Winston Churchill. My hometown football coach expressed a similar thought: “The man with an alligator mouth and a hummingbird ass” would get more than his share of whippings.

The U.S. military today has a hummingbird’s ass. Despite decades of sky-high military spending, our force is incapable of defeating a peer or near-peer adversary in today’s complex, dangerous world. If we continue on our alligator-mouth-sized trajectory, the consequences will be catastrophic.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.