What those “political outcomes” will be and how the United States will attempt to influence events in Tehran in the wake of the Feb. 28 decapitation strike is for the president and Congress to determine, Colby said. That strike killed Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and more than 40 Iranian regime leaders.
The Pentagon’s definition of success, he said, is, “Degrading and destroying the conventional power projection capabilities of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and thus especially missile, one-way attack drones, capabilities, and their production,” as well as eliminating its naval forces.
“Those are the objectives of the campaign,” Colby said. “It’s not going to be a ‘forever war.’ It’s not going to be a nation-building effort.”
The under secretary drew sharp bipartisan criticism from the House panel for a range of issues with the national security strategy. The president issued the revised strategy in late November, including a “Trump Corollary” to President James Monroe’s 1823 policy that declared the Western Hemisphere a distinct sphere of U.S. influence.
The Monroe doctrine revival led to the Jan. 3 raid that captured Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro but left his socialist junta still ruling Caracas.
Chair Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) said there is “a breakdown in communications” between Congress and the Trump administration and Pentagon, not necessarily in reference to decisions leading to Operation Epic Fury, but to the broader implications of the strategy, especially when it comes to working with European nations in deterring Russian aggression.
The hearing only incidentally addressed unfolding events in the Middle East.
Rogers and others from both parties questioned the president’s defense strategy as developed without Congressional input.
“The strategy deprioritizes U.S. interests in the Middle East and delegates primary responsibility for addressing the Iran threat to regional allies and partners like Israel. This stands in direct contrast to President Trump’s decision this weekend to launch Operation Epic Fury,” Rogers said.
However, he conceded, “That decision underscored the president’s belief that preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and expanding its missile arsenal is a core U.S. national interest worth prioritizing.”







