Hagel should not be confirmed

Reuters

Current U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta (L) and U.S. President Barack Obama's nominee for Secretary of Defense, former Senator Chuck Hagel (R), stand next to each other at the White House in Washington January 7, 2013.

Article Highlights

  • Hagel & defenders have resorted to rebuttals that rely on assertions about what the nominee really believes

    Tweet This

  • Hagel should not be confirmed writes @DPletka

    Tweet This

  • Senators should judge Hagel not only on what he says now, but on his voting record in senate

    Tweet This

As Chuck Hagel, President Obama’s nominee for Defense secretary, makes the rounds on Capitol Hill, senators should judge him not only on what he says now, but also on his voting record in the U.S. Senate.

The Department of Defense recently sent around a fact sheet about the Nebraska Republican to dispel a number of “myths” that he is not supportive of Israel, is soft on Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas, would gut the defense budget and lacks the managerial experience for the job.

Perhaps things have changed since I spent a decade at the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, but I do not recall ever receiving such a missive from any government department about any nominee. First, the PR value is questionable, as this purported “fact sheet” only underscores the many troubling questions about a nominee it putatively assists. Second, it begs the question of whether the president himself asked these questions and suggests, given the weakness of the defense, that he did not. Lastly, it is rarely wise to assert — using partial quotes and unverifiable imputations of “belief” — that someone was misunderstood or misquoted when the historical record demonstrates the opposite.

Hagel’s record has been ably dissected. There are few in the national security realm not aware that he voted against designating Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity, that he demurred when 99 of his colleagues wrote a letter to the then Russian president decrying a rise in anti-Semitism, that he wrote to President Obama calling for direct talks with Hamas, that he referred to pro-Israel activists as “the Jewish lobby” and felt the need to suggest that the “Jewish lobby” “intimidates” members of Congress.

Most are well aware he believes the Defense Department remains “bloated” even after nearly half a billion dollars in cuts (not including the prospect of sequestration that now looms); that he is an advocate of “global zero,” an effort to bring U.S. (and other) nuclear stockpiles down to ... zero; that he has an “A” rating from the NRA and a zero rating from NARAL. And some are aware that there are questions about Hagel’s management that have far less to do with the question of experience (after all, what “management experience” did Hillary Clinton bring to State?) and far more to do with the manner in which he led his Senate office.

In most cases, Hagel and his defenders have resorted to rebuttals that rely on assertions about what the nominee really believes. “Don’t look at my record and don’t listen to what I said,” Hagel and his team demand, “look into my heart.” He does, Hagel insists, care about the U.S.-Israel relationship. He says that he’s ready — oh so ready — to use force against Iran; is no less game than many to embrace Hamas and Hezbollah; is in fine company when he insists on eradicating nuclear weapons, beginning here at home (not in, say, Iran or North Korea); and that he hates sequestration. And as to the claim that underpinning his soft record on Iran and harsh record on Israel there is a hint of anti-Semitism, Hagel and team have trotted out a parade of Jews to insist it just ain’t so.

The problem is that while there are plenty who agree with Hagel on Israel, Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, sanctions, Pentagon bloat, eliminating nuclear weapons and the “intimidation” of the “Jewish lobby,” they are not being nominated to lead the Department of Defense. Nor does one’s ability to summon up supporters of a particular caliber or religion vitiate a clear pattern of behavior.

Most nominees have situational political transformations. It is rare that one finds anyone totally in sync with any president’s every utterance, and fewer still who agree with all the Democrats and Republicans on the committee that will hear their nomination. Yet, in order to be confirmed, nominees will promise the earth. Confirmation is, after all, the moment of maximal Senate leverage over any executive branch official. Once confirmed, that leverage disappears, and for the most part, we see reversion to the mean.

What does that tell us about the Hagel nomination? It tells us that he will do his utmost to persuade senators of his bona fides regarding all those “myths” the Pentagon sought to refute. And I have little doubt he will do a good job; Hagel is a suave politician with a keen memory and a knack for pleasing those he wishes to propitiate. But unless he can go back in time and rewrite his record, his situational transformation must be dismissed. Hagel should not be confirmed.

Pletka is vice president for foreign and defense studies at the American Enterprise Institute.

Also Visit
AEIdeas Blog The American Magazine
About the Author

 

Danielle
Pletka

  • As a long-time Senate Committee on Foreign Relation senior professional staff member for the Near East and South Asia, Danielle Pletka was the point person on Middle East, Pakistan, India and Afghanistan issues. As the vice president for foreign and defense policy studies at AEI, Pletka writes on national security matters with a focus on Iran and weapons proliferation, the Middle East, Syria, Israel and the Arab Spring. She also studies and writes about South Asia: Pakistan, India and Afghanistan.


    Pletka is the co-editor of “Dissent and Reform in the Arab World: Empowering Democrats” (AEI Press, 2008) and the co-author of “Containing and Deterring a Nuclear Iran” (AEI Press, 2011) and “Iranian influence in the Levant, Egypt, Iraq, and Afghanistan” (AEI Press, 2012). Her most recent study, “America vs. Iran: The competition for the future of the Middle East,” was published in January 2014.


     


    Follow Danielle Pletka on Twitter.


  • Phone: 202-862-5943
    Email: dpletka@aei.org
  • Assistant Info

    Name: Alexandra Della Rocchetta
    Phone: 202-862-7152
    Email: alex.dellarocchetta@aei.org

What's new on AEI

image Getting it right: US national security policy and al Qaeda since 2011
image Net neutrality rundown: What the NPRM means for you
image The Schuette decision
image Snatching failure from victory in Afghanistan
AEI on Facebook
Events Calendar
  • 21
    MON
  • 22
    TUE
  • 23
    WED
  • 24
    THU
  • 25
    FRI
Wednesday, April 23, 2014 | 12:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m.
Graduation day: How dads’ involvement impacts higher education success

Join a diverse group of panelists — including sociologists, education experts, and students — for a discussion of how public policy and culture can help families lay a firmer foundation for their children’s educational success, and of how the effects of paternal involvement vary by socioeconomic background.

Thursday, April 24, 2014 | 12:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m.
Getting it right: A better strategy to defeat al Qaeda

This event will coincide with the release of a new report by AEI’s Mary Habeck, which analyzes why current national security policy is failing to stop the advancement of al Qaeda and its affiliates and what the US can do to develop a successful strategy to defeat this enemy.

Event Registration is Closed
Friday, April 25, 2014 | 9:15 a.m. – 1:15 p.m.
Obamacare’s rocky start and uncertain future

During this event, experts with many different views on the ACA will offer their predictions for the future.   

Event Registration is Closed
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.