WASHINGTON — Tulsi Gabbard, who has been appointed by President-elect Donald Trump as the prospective head of U.S. intelligence services, had previously endorsed a key rationale from Russia regarding its invasion of Ukraine in 2022. This rationale entailed claims about numerous U.S.-funded biological laboratories purportedly engaged in research on some of the most dangerous pathogens in the world.
Moscow has contended that these labs were utilized by Ukraine to manufacture lethal biological weapons akin to COVID-19, thus justifying Russia’s military action to safeguard its own national interests. However, these labs are well-documented and are part of a broader international initiative aimed at managing health crises and preventing the development of bioweapons.
Gabbard, a military veteran and former Congresswoman from Hawaii, later clarified that she did not intend to imply any malicious intent from the U.S. or Ukraine, but was rather raising concerns about the safety of these laboratories. Nonetheless, her critics—spanning both major political parties—view her comments as a concerning inclination to echo Russian propaganda, a stance that has earned her favorable mentions on Russian state television.
Past remarks made by Gabbard supportive of Russia, along with undisclosed meetings with Syrian President Bashar Assad—who is closely allied with both Russia and Iran—are now drawing intense scrutiny from Democratic lawmakers and national security experts. They express fears that if Gabbard were to be confirmed as Trump’s Director of National Intelligence, it could serve to benefit Russia, undermine support for Ukraine, and compromise U.S. national security as well as intelligence partnerships with allies.
According to former national security adviser John Bolton, Gabbard’s potential role parallels that of another Trump appointee, calling them akin to “hand grenades” that could explode politically. He urged Republican colleagues who support Trump to reconsider the long-term implications for their personal reputations and historical legacies.
Gabbard asserts that U.S. aid to Ukraine poses risks to global stability by antagonizing Russia. She has openly criticized Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, labeling him corrupt, while empathizing with Russia’s perspective regarding Ukraine’s NATO aspirations. Shortly after the Russian invasion began in 2022, she posted on social media that “This war and suffering could have easily been avoided if Biden Admin/NATO had simply acknowledged Russia’s legitimate security concerns.”
Democrats are raising alarms that Gabbard’s statements reflect a troubling pro-Russian alignment that could threaten U.S. national security should she be appointed. Senator Elizabeth Warren voiced concerns regarding granting Gabbard access to sensitive U.S. intelligence, questioning whether it is wise to allow someone so seemingly aligned with Putin to wield significant power.
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence was established following the September 11, 2001, attacks to ensure cohesive operation among the nation’s intelligence agencies and to serve as the primary intelligence advisor to the president.
Gabbard has not responded to inquiries for comments but has defended her views, explaining her long military service in the Army National Guard has led her to be skeptical of military interventions. She has also articulated a favorable view of Trump’s interactions with authoritarian leaders, suggesting that such diplomacy demonstrates a commitment to achieving peace while reserving military options for last resorts.
Her previous meeting with Assad in 2017 had incited anger among many of her fellow Democrats, who criticized her for allegedly legitimizing a leader implicated in war crimes and one who has allowed Russian and Iranian forces to establish a foothold in Syria. Since 2015, when Assad welcomed Russian military support to suppress a popular rebellion, both Russian troops and Iranian-backed militias have remained active in the country, often engaging in hostilities against U.S. troops.
After an unsuccessful bid for the presidency in 2020, Gabbard subsequently endorsed Joe Biden, who won against Trump. In the following years, she left the Democratic Party, calling her former comrades an “elitist cabal of warmongers” and later became an independent. She has supported several high-profile Republican candidates, contributed to Fox News, and launched her own podcast.
Her stance regarding Russia has garnered attention in Moscow, where state-run media have praised her and humorously labeled her as a Russian agent. One article from a key Russian state media outlet even referred to her as a “superwoman,” acknowledging her previous appearances on Russian television and claiming that Ukrainian intelligence now considers her a potential asset to Russian special services.
Gabbard’s views on Russia and Syria are expected to be pivotal during her Senate confirmation hearing. Senator John Cornyn remarked that he has reservations about her past comments yet maintains faith in her patriotism, citing her military background. America’s allies are closely monitoring her nomination, concerned about how the incoming Trump administration might influence intelligence collaboration moving forward.
Trump’s election poses “very complex issues” for America’s allies and particularly for members of the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing alliance, which comprises the U.S., U.K., Australia, New Zealand, and Canada. Concerns have been raised regarding whether the United States might become more selective about the intelligence it shares, potentially leading to mistrust and compromising the long-standing relationship built on mutual cooperation.
As the transition unfolds, some officials from allied nations have opted to refrain from commenting on Gabbard and other Trump appointees. Following Biden’s poor performance in a critical debate that ultimately marked the ascent of Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic contender, several key European leaders underscored a need to develop a security strategy less dependent on the U.S.