Hagel for defense, the pros and the cons

Chuck Hagel, the former Republican senator from Nebraska who quietly backed Barack Obama in his 2008 run for president, has endorsed Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.), who is running to replace Arlen Specter.

This has set off a firestorm of speculation that he is cozying up to Democrats to position himself to succeed Robert Gates as defense secretary.

More from Ben Smith at Politico:

The case for Hagel, one source tells me, is being made by National Security Adviser Jim Jones, and it’s not a weak one. With Gates’s departure, Obama loses a high-profile Republican defender on the national security front, and there are few Republicans of stature who could easily be pictured in the job.

Hagel would provide some of the same political cover as Gates, shielding Obama if Petraeus or the generals complain about a lack of White House commitment to Afghanistan or other defense issues. And he has other assets. Being one of the Senate club might ensure an easy confirmation. He’s also ideologically in sync with Obama, to a degree at least: He opposed the war in Iraq, has spoken of the need to leave Afghanistan, and — though this is hazier territory — has infuriated supporters of Israel for a refusal to sign on to the many statements of support on the Hill for the Jewish State, and by suggesting the more dispassionate approach to that conflict that — on some days — Obama seems to prefer.

Jen Rubin at Commentary delves a little deeper into that "dispassionate" approach, and wonder if Hagel’s stand-back posture on Iran would keep him from being confirmed:

Indeed, it is unclear, with a nuclear-armed Iran looming and a more Republican Senate in the offing, whether Hagel would be confirmable. His national security record would be hard to defend, even by Democrats wishing to support the faltering president.

For example, in 2006, when Hezbollah’s attacks provoked Israeli retaliation and the war in Lebanon, Hagel screeched for the president to demand an immediate cease-fire, arguing it was essential in order to “enhance America’s image and give us the trust and credibility to lead a lasting and sustained peace effort in the Middle East.” Our credibility, in his eyes, depends on the United States’s preventing Israel from defending itself.

Last year, Hagel signed a letter urging Obama to open direct negotiations with Hamas, a position so extreme that Obama hasn’t (yet) embraced it.

On Iran, Hagel was one of two senators in 2004 to vote against renewal of the Libya-Iran sanctions act. (”Messrs. Hagel and Lugar … want a weaker stance than most other senators against the terrorists in Iran and Syria and the West Bank and Gaza and against those who help the terrorists. They are more concerned than most other senators about upsetting our erstwhile allies in Europe — the French and Germans — who do business with the terrorists.”)

Hagel seems to be a member in good standing of the Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett school of Iran suck-uppery. In 2007 Hagel wanted to open direct, unconditional talks with Iran. (”It could create a historic new dynamic in US-Iran relations, in part forcing the Iranians to react to the possibility of better relations with the West.”) In 2007 he voted against designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization. In 2008 he voted against Iran sanctions.

Conservative pro-Israel groups are hoping that Hagel’s endorsement will work against Sestak among Pennsylvania’s Jews. Here’s the Republican Jewish Coalition, in an email blast:

The announcement today that former Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel will endorse Democrat Joe Sestak and campaign with him in Pennsylvania raises serious and important questions for the Jewish Community.

Specifically, it raises the question of whether Joe Sestak accepts or rejects Hagel’s views on Israel and the Middle East.

While in the Senate, Chuck Hagel had a troubling record on Israel and Middle East issues.  In fact, he consistently had one of the worst pro-Israel records of any Senator.

The National Jewish Democratic Council described Hagel’s record as ‘questionable’ and warned that if he sought the presidency, he would have ‘a lot of questions to answer about his commitment to Israel.’ (http://njdc.typepad.com/njdcs_blog/2007/03/indecisive_sena.html)

In the past, Joe Sestak has said that Hagel is ‘the guy I most admired in the Senate.’ (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/sestaks-favorite-senator-has-questionable-record-israel-says-njdc)

Now, with Hagel’s endorsement of Sestak, we know that the admiration is mutual.

And the Emergency Commitee for Israel, founded by Bill Kristol and Gary Bauer, echoes the RJC’s points:

Why would Chuck Hagel, a former Republican Senator from Nebraska, endorse Joe Sestak, a Democratic candidate for Senate in Pennsylvania

They both share one thing in common: a record on Israel that is deeply troubling to anyone who cares about a strong U.S.-Israel relationship and the clarity of American leadership in the Middle East.

Chuck Hagel’s record in the Senate is unique in its hostility to Israel. He repeatedly refused to join large majorities in supporting Israel’s right of self-defense and he repeatedly obstructed efforts to sanction Iran and hold terrorist groups, such as Hezbollah, accountable. Hagel’s record on Israel is so poor that the Republican Jewish Coalition refused to support his campaign and the National Jewish Democratic Council publicly warned the Obama administration that it may criticize any attempt to appoint Hagel to a policy or leadership position in government.

Here’s that NJDC warning, by the way, delivered by then-NJDC executive director Ira Forman after Hagel was named co-chairman of the Obama administration’s National Intelligence Advisory Board, in an interview with the Weekly Standard:

He suggested that NJDC would publicly oppose Hagel’s nomination for a position with more authority. "If [Hagel] was taking a policy role, we’d have real concerns," Forman said. And Forman indicated that his group would oppose Hagel’s appointment to any position that had influence over U.S.-Israel relations.

And here’s the NJDC fact sheet on the Emergency Committee and its fact sheet on Sestak.