Until his name was floated as a possible Secretary of Defense, I had no idea that Chuck Hagel had strained relationships with the Israeli government and their lobbyists here in the United States. When I read the list of his supposed sins, the only thing that causes me any concern is his poor assessment of the nature and intentions of the Syrian government. That he opposed a preemptive war with Iran and recommended opening a dialogue with Hamas indicates that he has a clear-eyed view of reality, not that he has any animus for Israel. It seems to me that Hagel has been correct to say that the peace process in the Middle East cannot be advanced by driving a wedge between Fatah and Hamas, as that only perpetuates a condition in which Israel has no unified negotiating partner that can deliver on its promises. His opposition to sanctions against Iran is questionable, but must be considered in the context of his overall opposition to the neo-conservatives’ drive to war with Iran during Bush’s presidency.
Overall, Hagel seems to have been opposed to our inclination, post 9/11, to designate anyone we disagreed with as a terrorist organization and to cease having any dialogue with them. In one or two cases, he may have taken this opposition a little too far, but he certainly erred less frequently than the neo-cons, or even our foreign policy establishment in general.
What’s sad is how easily this principled stand against neo-conservatism in his own party can be redefined as hostility to Israel. Chuck Hagel should not be punished for being mostly-right when our foreign policy elites in both parties were mostly-wrong.
I don’t know if the Israeli Lobby is going to oppose him with everything they’ve got, but I think that would be a mistake. The Netanyahu government and their neo-conservative allies here in the United States have alienated the president enough already. Getting off on the wrong foot in the second term is probably a very bad idea.
.
Booman you need to provide correct link above!
Haaretz on Chuck Hagel in 2008
He will most likely be a candidate for the Pentagon. If Obama has courage and place Hagel on State, my view on renewed peace initiatives would get a boost. It may be too costly for Congressional politics to put senator Kerry on State. Either candidate would get my preference over Amb. Susan Rice.
fixed.
I think Kerry would be a lousy SoS in addition to opening up the Scott Brown can of worms again. The job description requires gravitas and persuasiveness more than anything else and in that regard Kerry reminds me, painfully, of Romney. Kerry has about as much gravitas as PeeWee Herman. Clinton has it in spades. Kerry, no no no. If we can’t have Rice, I’d prefer Hagel to Kerry. Or Powell, if he wasn’t stained with the stink of Bush & Cheney. Why not Samantha Power? Or if he’s determined to have a Republican, what about Richard Lugar?
Actually, he should nominate McCain and have the democrats spread some bald-face lies about him and refuse to confirm him – that would be poetic justice.
Or how about a Jewish SoS who hates Netayahu? He’d have about 5 million to choose from.
ABC News is reporting that Obama has already picked Kerry for State.
Woops. This was supposed to be a reply to Oui’s post.
Yes, like I said, I wanted Hagel at State or Defense as far back as 2008/2009. He’s a true statesman, even if I don’t like his domestic politics. But I think he has always had the US interest at heart (he’s just wrong on policy heh). However, he supported Obama in 2008, and quite obviously in 2012. He’s a foreign policy realist.
Now, I hope Obama isn’t going to nominate him and then let him hang there like he did with say, Dawn Johnson, then throw up his hands and nominate someone less-desirable.
Don’t be surprised if the Israeli lobby goes after him with everything they’ve got. They don’t like him. Lieberman hates his guts. And they already defeated one of Obama’s best nominees, Chas Freeman, in 2009.
And he wanted to treat Syria like a normal country. Fancy that. He had the right views there as well, not wrong. Hagel heading to the DoD would be better than any Democrat Obama could muster. Fuck Kos and his stupid petition.
Maybe it’s shallow of me, but I think these two things speak very well for Hagel:
I’m tired of Democrats appointing Republican daddies to be the Secretary of Defense. You’d think we could find some strong Democrats to get in there and reform the place.
Less Cold War weapons. Better veterans’ services. Lean and mean rather than bloated and bureaucratic. If Hagel is really willing to take on the military industrial complex and war profiteers I’d give him a chance. But I have yet to see anything saying that he’d knock some heads.
Leon Panetta is not a Republican, and one of the advantages that Hagel will have over Panetta is that he is strongly associated with advocacy for budget cuts to defense.
I don’t see any path to real peace in the Middle East that doesn’t involve telling the Israel lobby to go fuck themselves. In my view, US policy toward Israel should be that they don’t get another dime from us until they stop building settlements on occupied territory. And Palestinians are Semites too, you assholes.
.
Later in 2009, he revisited another of his longstanding foreign policy fixations–his belief in the good intentions of the Assad regime–and told a J Street conference, “I believe there is a real possibility of a shift in Syria’s strategic thinking and policies. . . . Syria wants to talk–at the highest levels–and everything is on the table.”
How horrible for Chuck Hagel and Israel …
Interesting find about the Golan.
Here are some yummy wingnut tears about John Kerry: http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/11/30/wikileaks-cables-expose-john-kerry-as-an-enemy-of-peace-in-th
e-mideast/
A good, hard F-you from Obama might be just what the Israelis need to snap back to reality.
I agree, but Obama only gives GHFYs to Krugman, Reich, and progressives in general. As for Hagel, if Netanyahu and Lieberman don’t like him, that’s a good start. And remember that before the confirmation hearing, Lieberman will FINALLY be gone. And Netanyahu, contrary to popular belief, doesn’t actually get an official vote in the senate.
Here’s what I don’t understand: politicians bend over backwards to please the Miami exiles, even though they’re no longer a majority of Cuban-Americans, much less Latinos. And they bend over even farther to please the Israeli neocons even though Jews are only 2.1% of the US population and I’ve yet to meet a single US Jew who doesn’t hate Netanyahu more than I do – and I REALLY hate Netanyahu. (To be completely accurate, I do know one US Jewish neocon, but only one). So: US Jews who support Netanyahu – what do you think? 0.1% of the US population? And we base our entire foreign policy on pleasing them and the handful of brain-dead, senile, racist Cuban exiles who haven’t yet died from old age? What’s up with that? Our foreign policy deeply offends more Jews and Cubans than it pleases.
“US Jews who support Netanyahu – what do you think? 0.1% of the US population?”
Have you ever heard of the Christian right? At least 25% of the US population. The RW Jews make a great fig leaf for them, don’t they? Best proo — You seem to be unaware of their existence, at least as far as political support for Netanyahu. And you’re not alone in that.
Oh, and by the way. In our more conservative states, the Christian right represent a lot more than 25% of the population.
Of course being mostly right on US foreign policy, while the foreign policy establishment was mostly wrong, disqualifies Hagel. Look at the Sunday morning chat shows to see who’s taken seriously: Congressmen and pundits and think tank “experts” who have been consistently, egregiously wrong at every turn, especially over the last decade or so. People who’ve been largely right are persona non grata.
No way in hell Obama nominates a foreign policy Non-Person like Hagel to one of the most powerful jobs in town. His history of appointments shows zero evidence that he’d ever even consider doing such a thing. Thus far, Dennis Ross is much more his style.
I think you’re wrong on this one. Hagel is exactly his style and its probably the best time to play this card. Hagel is also not a non-person in foreign policy circles. There was a time when Obama was willing to throw people like Chas Freeman under the bus. The folks that orchestrated that don’t have the same leverage over Obama after his re-election.
This is not to say that Hagel is the best choice. He’s nowhere near radical enough.