Here’s what happened.
On Sunday night, Mark Levin, a prominent conservative voice, criticized Elbridge Colby, President Trump’s pick for Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, claiming that Colby’s views on Iran’s nuclear ambitions were jeopardizing national security. Levin’s remarks came in response to comments from right-wing figure Charlie Kirk, who argued that certain Senate Republicans were working behind the scenes to block Colby’s confirmation.
Kirk suggested that Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) was leading the effort to derail Colby’s nomination, asserting that Colby represented a significant check on the “Bush/Cheney cabal” at the Department of Defense (DOD). He also questioned Cotton’s motivations, wondering why the senator would oppose someone with such a vital role in challenging establishment foreign policy.
However, Levin expressed strong concerns over Colby’s position regarding Iran’s nuclear program. In 2010, Colby authored an article for Foreign Policy in which he argued that containing a nuclear-armed Iran was a feasible objective. This stance, which some Republicans view as too lenient, raised red flags for certain members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, including Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS), who confirmed that there were “concerns” about Colby’s views.
Other Republican senators, such as Mike Rounds (R-SD), acknowledged Colby’s past comments about U.S. retrenchment in the Middle East. While Rounds expressed his willingness to continue researching Colby’s background, he made it clear that some of Colby’s positions did not align with the aggressive stance the GOP typically advocates for regarding Iran.
Levin, aligning with these concerns, criticized Colby’s perspective, writing, “It is the unequivocal position of President Trump and every sane person that Iran must not get nukes.” He added that if Colby was indifferent to preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, he was the problem, not Cotton. Levin emphasized that Colby’s views were dangerous for national security, echoing Trump’s hardline stance on Iran.
Vice President JD Vance later defended Colby’s record, calling him consistent on major foreign policy issues, but Levin remained unconvinced. He promised to delve deeper into the issue on his radio show, expressing hope that Colby would align with President Trump’s uncompromising position on Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Levin further shared multiple articles reinforcing Trump’s firm approach to countering Iran’s nuclear threat, reminding his audience that protecting national security required unwavering resolve.
In a time of rising global tensions, Republican voters should demand that their representatives and nominees for critical positions, like Colby, hold firm to the values that prioritize American security, reject appeasement, and stand strong against adversaries like Iran.