Follow us on social

google cta
Randpaul

Sen. Rand Paul: My colleagues are 'beating the drums' for 'war with China'

The Kentucky senator bemoaned what he said was a rapid loss of 'strategic ambiguity' with Beijing.

Analysis | Military Industrial Complex
google cta
google cta

Senator Rand Paul acknowledged Thursday that his fellow Republicans are obsessed with China — war with China, that is.

The Kentucky Republican told an audience at the American Conservative's annual foreign policy conference that he is concerned that hawks on Capitol Hill are going to march the country right into a conflict.

“You come to my Republican caucus and you’ll hear the beating of drums. These are drums for war with whomever, but primarily war with China. Everything is about war with China.”

Not everyone is high on the idea of conflict, he added. “I was in Hawaii recently, talking with some folks from our military out there in the Pacific. One of the higher ranking members came up to me and said, ‘take this message back to your fellow Senators: war with China is not inevitable.’” 

"My goodness, shouldn’t we be talking about how to avoid war with China, not making it inevitable?"

"We have had an uneasy peace with China, we’ve have an uneasy relationship between China, the U.S. and Taiwan," Sen. Paul noted, but in the Committee on Foreign Relations, where he holds a seat, “there’s a new bill out each week on Taiwan, which usually includes harsh language on China, on how we’re going to war-plan, and what we're going to do when China does this or that.”

Paul added: "My point is that the less ambiguous you make your policy, the more you rant and rave, the more you make your policy more explicit for war,” the more dangerous and less leverage the U.S. has in the situation. “Strategic ambiguity has kept the peace for 50 years,” Paul charged.

The senator reinforced the importance of seeing foreign policy through the lens constitutional conservatism, something that his colleague Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) espoused in his own remarks at the conference. Paul said he would continue to push for the repeal of the 2001 AUMF (Authorization for the Use of Military Force), and is poised to criticize any use of a future Ukraine aid bill or emergency spending to pad the Pentagon budget. 

He also doubted that there has been enough effort to end the war in Ukraine (he had signed a letter to President Biden earlier this year opposing new Ukraine aid without a strategy for peace). “That country is being destroyed. Give it another year and it will be more destroyed. There ultimately must be a peace. If you think wars are going to end by the good defeating evil you are not being realistic. You need a negotiated peace.”


Senator Rand Paul, R-KY, at the American Conservative foreign policy conference, June 8, 2023. (vlahos)
google cta
Analysis | Military Industrial Complex
Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?
Top image credit: President Donald J. Trump holds a joint news conference at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Feb. 4, 2025. (Shutterstock/ Joshua Sukoff)

Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?

QiOSK

In the months that led up to the Iraq War, the Bush administration went to extraordinary lengths to convince the world of the need to oust Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Leading officials laid out their case in public, sharing what they claimed was evidence that Iraq was moving rapidly toward the deployment of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. When U.S. tanks rolled across the border, everyone knew the justification: the U.S. was determined to thwart Iraq’s development of weapons of mass destruction, however fictitious that threat would later prove to be.

In the months that led up to the Iran War, the Trump administration took a different tack. President Trump spoke only occasionally of Iran, offering a smattering of justifications for growing U.S. tensions with the country. He claimed without evidence that Iran was rebuilding its nuclear program after the U.S.-Israeli attack last June and even developing missiles that could strike the United States. But he insisted that Tehran could make a deal with seven magic words: “we will never have a nuclear weapon.”

keep readingShow less
Starmer Macron Merz
Top image credit: France's President Emmanuel Macron, Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz arrive at Kyiv railway station on May 10, 2025, ahead of a gathering of European leaders in the Ukrainian capital. LUDOVIC MARIN/Pool via REUTERS
Europe's snapback gamble risks killing diplomacy with Iran

Craven Europeans give US and Israel a blank check for illegal war

Middle East

In the aftermath of the new U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran, the transatlantic alliance has offered a response that confirmed what many both in the West and outside knew all along: that for London, Paris, Berlin, and Brussels, the "rules-based international order" has been reduced to a simple, brutal premise: might makes right, provided the might is Western.

The joint statement from the E3 — France, Germany, and the United Kingdom — is a master class in evasion. "We did not participate in these strikes, but are in close contact with our international partners, including the United States and Israel," they declared. The text also lists all the references and rationalizations used by Iran hawks — “nuclear program, ballistic missile program, regional destabilization and repression against its own people.”

keep readingShow less
Trump Iran
Top image credit: Hundreds of people attend a pro-democracy demonstration against U.S. President Donald Trump in Washington, D.C., U.S., on February 28, 2026. Demonstrators cited a number of reasons for their opposition to Trump, including his involvement with sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, ICE raids, authoritarian policies, and today’s bombing of Iran. (Photo by Allison Bailey/NurPhoto) via REUTERS CONNECT

How does this war with Iran end? Or does it?

QiOSK

Now that President Trump has launched an illegal, unprovoked war of choice on Iran, the next question inevitably becomes: how does this end? Or, what are some off ramps Trump can take to end it before the situation turns out of control?

There are three broad scenarios; the first and most likely is that Trump continues this until he gets some sort of regime implosion and then declares victory, while also washing his hands of whatever follows.

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.