“I can’t in good conscience look away as America crumbles at home and politicians tax us to send the money to corrupt and duplicitous regimes abroad,” Rand Paul said of U.S. arms sales to Pakistan. | AP Photo Senate rejects Rand Paul on Pakistan arms sale

Sen. Rand Paul took a stand Thursday — and he wasn’t alone.

In his latest move to buck his party leadership on the floor, the Kentucky Republican invoked an obscure 1970s law to force the Senate to vote on selling $700 million worth of fighter jets to Pakistan. While Paul got his debate on the floor and a roll-call vote, the Senate scuttled his effort, 71-24, on a procedural vote.


“I can’t in good conscience look away as America crumbles at home and politicians tax us to send the money to corrupt and duplicitous regimes abroad,” Paul said on the Senate floor Thursday. “Pakistan is at best a frenemy. Part friend — and a lot of enemy.”

But just because the Senate voted against Paul doesn't mean he's standing alone. In fact, Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) says he shares Paul's concerns about selling $700 million in F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan when the country has failed to root out the Haqqani network, the Taliban offshoot that's used Pakistan as a safe haven to launch attacks in Afghanistan, including against U.S. troops.

Corker says he’s allowing the F-16 sale to proceed, but he's blocking Pakistan’s request for U.S. help to finance the deal, which he can do single-handedly as Foreign Relations chairman. Still, he said bluntly on the Senate floor that he disagreed with Paul’s tactics, if not his overall aims.

“Think about where a country is radicalized and has so many problems as the country of Pakistan has, the public embarrassment that will take place by our body doing this,” Corker said. “Let’s work together in other ways that actually can generate behavior change by dealing with it in more subtle ways than this blunt object that we’re dealing with today.”

Corker’s Democratic counterpart on the committee — Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland — also urged senators to reject Paul’s proposal in order to “allow us to continue the diplomatic path in regards to that region.”

Both Corker and Cardin say they aren’t allowing the Obama administration to proceed with financing the deal to Pakistan, which Cardin said would involve moving money currently designated for the fight in Afghanistan to help pay for the F-16 fighters.

Paul received support from a mix of Democrats and Republicans critical of Pakistan’s terrorism record, including Democratic Sens. Mark Warner of Virginia and Chris Murphy of Connecticut and Republicans Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire and Chuck Grassley of Iowa.

“The Pakistanis have been an unreliable partner over the course of the last 10 years in the fight against extremism,” Murphy said. “But what I worry more is that these F-16s will provide cover, will provide substitute for truly meaningful action inside Pakistan to take on the roots of extremism.”

Others say the sale should go forward, like Senate Armed Services Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.), who opposes Corker’s move to hold up the financing.

“I don’t agree with Sen. Corker,” McCain said. “It is pretty standard to help with the financing, especially of countries that one, are not very wealthy, and two, are our allies. And it’s important they have these capabilities. I just disagree.”

Paul’s resolution of disapproval, if passed in both chambers, could have blocked the sale outright, which the State Department approved last month. The Kentucky Republican, who recently ended his presidential bid, used the obscure Arms Export Control Act of 1976 that allows any member of the Senate to secure a floor vote to disapprove an arms sale.

Paul has been a frequent critic of both Pakistan and foreign aid, and in 2012 he introduced a resolution to cut off all U.S. aid to Pakistan.

Thursday’s vote was primarily procedural, however, as the law states that the senator secure a floor vote to discharge the petition from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, if the committee has not acted on the resolution in 10 days.

The last time the Senate voted on a resolution under the Arms Export Control Act was 30 years ago, according to Paul’s office, when then-Sen. Alan Cranston (D-Calif.) forced a roll call to block the sale of certain missiles and defense services to Saudi Arabia.