Republican senators are expressing a range of reactions—some publicly, others privately—regarding Vice President JD Vance’s recently leaked remarks about U.S. military engagement with the Iran-backed Houthi rebels. The comments, which were part of a group chat that mistakenly included Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg, have sparked internal discussion within the Republican Party about the direction of its foreign policy stance.
In the leaked messages, Vance reportedly voiced concern over the strategic rationale behind conducting strikes on Houthi targets in Yemen, questioning whether the action served U.S. national interests. He also suggested that the threat posed by the Houthis was more relevant to Europe than to the United States and expressed reluctance about the idea of “bailing Europe out again.” Vance proposed a delay in the military response, citing the need for better public messaging and a clearer understanding of the economic situation.
The remarks were met with a mixture of support and criticism from Republican senators. Some lawmakers defended Vance’s right to share his viewpoint in what he believed was a private policy discussion. Others expressed concern about what they view as an increasingly isolationist tone from a growing segment of the party.
Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) described Vance’s position as consistent, though he disagreed with the substance of it. “JD is consistent on this. He does not like to see the deployment or the projection of American power outside of a direct threat to the United States,” Tillis said in comments to Jewish Insider. “I disagree with him, but he is consistent.”
Other senators were more critical, suggesting that Vance’s assessment of the Houthi threat failed to recognize the group’s involvement in attacks on U.S. personnel and assets. A Republican senator who asked not to be named told Jewish Insider that Vance’s comments were “very disappointing” and not representative of the broader Senate GOP consensus.
Another senator said Vance’s suggestion that the strikes were motivated by a desire to assist Europe did not align with the national security implications of Houthi attacks on American naval vessels and regional allies. “It was shocking to me that he didn’t see the need to strike back when they struck our naval vessels,” the senator said. “That’s not a British problem or a European problem.”
The conversation also raised concerns about Vance’s broader foreign policy philosophy, particularly given his previous opposition to U.S. support for Ukraine. Multiple senators noted that while Vance’s views are not new, they reflect a shift among some Republican voters and leaders toward a more restrained global posture.
One senator, while acknowledging policy disagreements, said that Vance’s position had been fairly presented and debated within the administration. “I think the president’s instincts in this case were right. I’m glad [Vance] lost the argument,” the senator said. “It actually shows a healthy administration. They heard his argument.”
When asked for comment, the vice president’s office directed reporters to a statement issued by Donald Trump Jr., who strongly defended Vance and criticized unnamed Republican senators. “These seven cowardly neocons attacking JD anonymously are genuine pussies,” Trump Jr. said in the statement. “If they really feel this way, then they should at least be man enough to put their names to these quotes.”
🚨Donald Trump Jr. goes OFF on Republican Senators Anonymously Attacking JD Vance:
“These seven cowardly neocons attacking JD anonymously are genuine pussies.” pic.twitter.com/LiN43ZCgCt
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) March 27, 2025
Despite the private criticisms, some Republican lawmakers publicly supported Vance’s participation in the policy discussion. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) said that dissenting viewpoints are essential in forming strong policy. “They were encouraging different points of view before the president was able to make his decision,” Cornyn said. “When things aren’t confidential, then people don’t feel free to express themselves.”
Senator Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) also supported the vice president’s engagement, stating that Vance is “supposed to ask questions.” Senator John Kennedy (R-LA) focused instead on the outcome of the situation, expressing support for President Trump’s decision to conduct the strikes. “I think Trump’s right to knock them into a new zip code and hold Iran responsible,” Kennedy said.
Meanwhile:
The United States is strong thanks to the strength of our Armed Forces.
President Trump and I want excellence in America’s military, and we are going to make sure our Marines are the best, most lethal fighting force in the world 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/sCPVFWpby2
— Vice President JD Vance (@VP) March 27, 2025
This is part of a bigger conversation happening not just in Washington, but around kitchen tables across the country—about what role the U.S. should play in the world, how much it should cost, and what truly keeps Americans safe. As the administration moves forward, these discussions are likely to shape not only foreign policy decisions, but the direction of the party itself.
