Tulsi Gabbard faced intense questioning during her confirmation hearing, with critics zeroing in on her controversial foreign policy positions. Her 2017 meeting with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and her opposition to U.S. military strikes in Syria drew sharp scrutiny. Supporters argue her stance prioritizes diplomacy, while detractors question her judgment. The hearing highlighted the complexities of balancing non-interventionism with global accountability. How these tensions shape her political future remains an open question.
As Tulsi Gabbard faced scrutiny over her positions on international affairs, criticisms and endorsements of U.S. foreign policy became a focal point. During the hearing highlights, Gabbard critiqued U.S. regime change efforts, arguing they have destabilized regions and exacerbated conflicts rather than achieving strategic objectives.
She opposed U.S. military interventions in Iraq and Libya, stating they worsened conditions in these countries. Gabbard also called for an end to the war in Afghanistan and criticized ongoing operations in Syria and Iraq, advocating against bombing or occupying foreign nations without clear, positive outcomes. Her policy responses included supporting legislation to block U.S. military action against Bashar al-Assad, emphasizing the need to avoid prolonged conflicts.
Gabbard's stance on Iran also drew attention. While she co-sponsored the Nuclear Iran Prevention Act in 2013 to impose sanctions on Iran's nuclear program, she later voted in favor of the Joint Thorough Plan of Action (JCPOA) and opposed its withdrawal under the Trump administration. She described Iran as a state sponsor of terrorism but warned against the dangers of military escalation, advocating for reentering the JCPOA to deescalate tensions. Her position reflected a focus on diplomacy over confrontation, even as she acknowledged Iran's problematic behavior.
Gabbard's controversial 2017 meeting with Assad raised questions about her views on Syria. She doubted the Assad regime's involvement in chemical weapons attacks, contradicting international consensus, and opposed Obama's proposed military strikes in Syria. She argued that U.S. regime change efforts prolonged suffering and strengthened terrorist groups, calling for reestablishing diplomatic relations to achieve peace. Her critics accused her of legitimizing Assad's regime, while she maintained that dialogue was essential to ending the conflict. Her Syria trip was a key point of contention during her confirmation hearing.
Her positions extended to other global issues, including criticizing Saudi Arabia's actions in Yemen and advocating for ending U.S. support. She also supported reducing tensions with Russia, suggesting its security concerns should have been addressed to avoid conflict. Gabbard co-sponsored legislation to prohibit first-use of nuclear weapons, emphasizing the importance of diplomacy and caution in military interventions, while maintaining a critical stance on U.S. foreign policy's consequences.
