n his earliest days in Congress, Kentucky Republican Sen.
Rand Paul staked out new territory for the GOP when he proposed cutting defense spending by 10% and eliminating foreign aid. "A more restrained foreign policy is the true conservative foreign policy," he said in 2011.
Three years later, Mr. Paul is backing U.S. airstrikes against Islamic militants in Syria and Iraq, the first military action he's supported since winning election. He now wants to freeze foreign aid at $5 billion, keep money flowing to Israel and restore some defense cuts.
The latest twist in Mr. Paul's foreign-policy evolution came Thursday when he voted against funding moderate Syrian rebels as part of the Obama administration's effort to combat the Islamic State.
"ISIS is now a threat. Let's get on with destroying them," Mr. Paul said on the Senate floor. "But make no mistake—arming Islamic rebels in Syria will only make it harder to destroy ISIS."
Mr. Paul, a likely 2016 presidential contender, is making adjustments to his foreign-policy profile that is bringing him more in line with his party's mainstream and a step away from its isolationist libertarian wing. That could ease his path to the nomination, but is also creating openings for critics and rivals.
"He's trying to reconcile his past statements with the current crisis and it's not working," said former Bush administration official Brian Hook, who advised 2012 Republican nominee
Mitt Romney. "His foreign policy seems to be of a day-to-day variety, and as a consequence he's playing catchup."
In June, Mr. Paul questioned the case being made for waging war against ISIS. "Why should we choose a side, and if we do, who are we really helping?" he asked in a Wall Street Journal column Two weeks ago, Mr. Paul wrote in Time magazine that he supported "destroying" ISIS.
The senator has said he changed his mind after ISIS militants beheaded two American journalists. Staffers say he judges each situation by asking: Are American lives and national security at stake? Will military action have unintended consequences?
"It's a lot easier for his opponents, who are mostly people who want to intervene all of the time, no matter what the situation, to paint him as someone who doesn't want to intervene any of the time, which he has said over and over is not who he is," said Doug Stafford, Mr. Paul's top political adviser. "He's a conservative realist who will look at each situation."
In recent weeks, polls show voters leaning toward a more active U.S. foreign policy. The shift also is apparent in the tea party, which makes up Mr. Paul's political base. In the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News survey, 68% of tea-party supporters, compared with 61% of voters overall, said military action against ISIS is in the national interest.
One potential 2016 rival, Florida Sen.
Marco Rubio, appeared to swipe at Mr. Paul for changing his position.
"What is unfortunate is that too many leaders in both parties, including our president and some who aspire to be president, have shown they would rather wait for poll numbers to change than to demonstrate the leadership necessary to shape them," said Mr. Rubio in a speech Wednesday. He favors airstrikes, as well as arming Syrian rebels.
Mr. Rubio called for military spending above the level requested by President Obama. That also puts Mr. Rubio at odds with Mr. Paul, who has offered smaller military budgets—hundreds of billions less than that of Mr. Obama and House Republicans—which he says will cut the debt, eliminate waste and realign the military for a post-Cold War era.
Mr. Hook, the former Romney adviser who co-sponsored Mr. Rubio's speech, said Mr. Paul's spending proposals were out of step with national security demands and would result in "an increased level of risk." He said he hasn't yet picked a 2016 candidate.
Richard Burt, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations who is advising Mr. Paul, said the U.S. could protect its interests with a smaller defense budget. "What Rand Paul is not doing is engaging in fear mongering as a political device to increase defense spending," Mr. Burt said.
Mr. Paul, 51 years old, hasn't made recommendations for military spending this year. In a written statement, he said his most recent budget increases spending by $125 billion during the next decade.
"I have always supported providing the Department of Defense with all the funding they need to protect our country," he said." I will support the funding that is necessary to combat ISIS."
