In a political chess game that could rival any thriller, Mike Waltz, the former National Security Advisor, has moved one step closer to becoming the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations after a tight Senate committee vote.
According to the New York Post, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, under GOP leadership, voted 12-10 on Thursday to push Waltz’s nomination to a full Senate floor vote, marking a significant hurdle cleared in a process fraught with tension.
President Trump tapped Waltz for the role after a rocky patch involving the so-called Signalgate controversy, but not before initially naming Rep. Elise Stefanik for the position, only to retract it over concerns about the GOP’s thin House majority.
In the meantime, Dorothy Shea has actively served as interim U.S. ambassador to the UN while Waltz’s nomination stirred political tensions—especially with the shadow of Signalgate looming large.
The controversy erupted when Waltz, serving as National Security Advisor, accidentally added Atlantic editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg to a Signal chat intended to plan strikes against the Houthis. As a result, sensitive military plans from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth leaked publicly.
During the confirmation hearing, Democrats grilled Waltz over the blunder, directly challenging his judgment in handling classified discussions—a misstep that, in earlier eras, might have sunk his nomination in a less forgiving political climate.
Yet, despite the skepticism, Waltz found an unexpected ally in Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), the ranking member who crossed party lines to back him, tipping the scales in a vote that could have deadlocked without her.
“In a Situation Room filled with people like Vice President Vance and Under Secretary Colby, who want to retreat from the world, and like Secretary Hegseth, I think we’re better off having someone like Mike Waltz present,” Shaheen told Axios. But let’s be real—while her support is noble, it’s hard to ignore that $75 million in aid to Nigeria and Haiti conveniently unlocked by the State Department might have greased the wheels of this bipartisan moment.
Shaheen also called Waltz a “moderating force,” promising to keep him in check. Moderating, perhaps, but conservatives might wonder if this is just another case of establishment politics bending to pragmatic deals rather than principle.
Notably, Senator Rand Paul (R‑Ky.), well‑known for his libertarian streak, amplified the drama by declining to endorse the recommendation—though he permitted the nomination to proceed—citing discomfort with Waltz’s hawkish foreign‑policy views.
Specifically, Paul criticized Waltz’s push, as a House member during the first Trump administration, to keep U.S. troops stationed in Afghanistan—a stance that directly conflicts with the America First ethos favoring reduced overseas commitments.
For many conservatives, Paul’s objections serve as a reminder that not every Republican endorses perpetual foreign engagements, even when Waltz’s credentials as a Trump loyalist are difficult to challenge.
Between leaving his National Security Advisor post and navigating this confirmation, Waltz stayed on the White House payroll as an adviser, a detail that raises eyebrows about the optics of such transitions in a climate hungry for transparency.
With Secretary of State Marco Rubio set to step into the National Security Advisor role post-Waltz, the administration is shuffling its deck to align with Trump’s vision, though critics might argue it’s a game of musical chairs with high stakes.
As Waltz awaits a full Senate vote, the conservative base can take heart that a fighter who’s weathered storms like Signalgate is poised to represent American interests at the UN, even if his path there highlights the messy, deal-driven nature of Washington politics.
