Follow us on social

google cta
Mike-lee-tac

Mike Lee: We need less 'peacocking and popping off’ when dealing with Russia

In address on Thursday, Senator makes case for realist foreign policy; says ‘the room of people making these decisions should be bigger.’

Washington Politics
google cta
google cta

Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) laid out his vision for a “realist” foreign policy on Thursday, arguing for an alternative to neoconservatism, liberal internationalism, and isolationism, one that is rooted in the U.S. Constitution, accountable to American voters, and one that decision makers in Washington clearly do not follow, particularly when it comes to the continued role in the war in Ukraine. 

Sen. Lee’s remarks came during The American Conserative’s tenth annual foreign policy conference, in which he argued for Congress to reclaim its warmaking power. “When the same people making decisions about foreign policy are wrong over and over and over, maybe the room of people making these decisions should be bigger,” he said.

Lee also explained why he thinks the ongoing war in Ukraine was illustrative of the shortcomings of decision making in Washington.  

While reasonable minds can disagree on whether and to what extent Washington should support Kyiv’s defense, “debate on this topic is not tolerated,” said Lee. “Anyone raising dissent or questions is immediately labeled a Putin apologist.” Lee argued that stifling such debate ignores three crucial strategic debates that should be a major consideration in all national security discussions.   

First, he said, the decisions over aid to Ukraine are not happening in a vacuum. Funding Ukraine to the extent that the U.S. has comes with trade-offs, and the continued level of support is depleting American weapons stockpiles and distracts from other emerging threats, namely China. 

Lee also lamented that the endgame to the war is rarely discussed and that it’s serving as a proxy for a larger, potentially dangerous, confrontation with Russia. “I don't think it is overstating anything to say that a stand off with a nuclear power requires a considerable amount of prudence and judgment, not peacocking and popping off,” he said. 

Given that Russia has the world’s largest stockpile of nuclear weapons and does not appear to be prepared to back down in Ukraine anytime soon, means, he added, that there needs to be a more mindful understanding of what is realistically achievable in this conflict. 

Lee also focused a substantial portion of his address stressing the importance of NATO allies and other European nations playing their part in funding security on their continent. "Our European allies have, for decades, shirked their own defense. For decades they've relied on America for their security," he said. For Lee, Washington’s willingness to pay for such a large portion of this effort means that Europe has no incentive to increase its own level of defense spending, and ensures that they will remain underprepared for the next conflict in the continent. A new poll published on Wednesday by the European Council on Foreign Relations found that almost three-quarters of Europeans agree with Sen. Lee that the continent must boost its own defense capacity, and cannot always rely on the U.S. to provide a security guarantee.  

Lee argued that Washington “should not spend one penny more” on Ukraine’s defense until other NATO members meet their defense commitments. The sentiment was echoed in a later panel by Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio), who said “as a condition for our participation in NATO, you have to honor the treaty. You have to fund your defense.” 


Sen. Mike Lee
google cta
Washington Politics
nuclear weapons testing
A mushroom cloud expands over the Bikini Atoll during a U.S. nuclear weapons test in 1946. (Shutterstock/ Everett Collection)

Nuke treaty loss a 'colossal' failure that could lead to nuclear arms race

Global Crises

On February 13th, 2025, President Trump said something few expected to hear. He said, “There's no reason for us to be building brand-new nuclear weapons. We already have so many. . . You could destroy the world 50 times over, 100 times over. And here we are building new nuclear weapons . . . We’re all spending a lot of money that we could be spending on other things that are actually, hopefully, much more productive.”

I could not agree more with that statement. But with today’s expiration of the New START Treaty, we face the very real possibility of a new nuclear arms race — something that, to my knowledge, neither the President, Vice President, nor any other senior U.S. official has meaningfully discussed.

keep readingShow less
Witkoff Kushner Trump
Top image credit: U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff looks on during a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, at Trump's Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, U.S., December 29, 2025. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

As US-Iran talks resume, will Israel play spoiler (again)?

Middle East

This Friday, the latest chapter in the long, fraught history of U.S.-Iran negotiations will take place in Oman. Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Araghchi and President Trump’s Special Envoy Steve Witkoff will meet in an effort to stave off a war between the U.S. and Iran.

The negotiations were originally planned as a multilateral forum in Istanbul, with an array of regional Arab and Muslim countries present, apart from the U.S. and Iran — Turkey, Qatar, Oman, and Saudi Arabia.

keep readingShow less
Trump Putin
Top image credit: Miss.Cabal/shutterstock.com

Last treaty curbing US, Russia nuclear weapons has collapsed

Global Crises

The end of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), the last treaty between the U.S. and Russia placing limits on their respective nuclear arsenals, may not make an arms race inevitable. There is still potential for pragmatic diplomacy.

Both sides can adhere to the basic limits even as they modernize their arsenals. They can bring back some of the risk-reduction measures that stabilized their relationship for years. And they can reengage diplomatically with each other to craft new agreements. The alternative — unconstrained nuclear competition — is dangerous, expensive, and deeply unpopular with most Americans.

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.