Interview with Senator Hagel - The Washington Diplomat

Chuck Hagel has given an interview to the Washington Diplomat discussing politics (Iraq, Afghanistan, the Republican Party, and more) and his post-Senate work.

Atlantic Council President Chuck Hagel on START

Chuck Hagel speaks on the progress and future of the new START agreement between the U.S. and Russia:

Press Release - Hagel to join Obama on trip to Iraq and Afghanistan

Yesterday Senator Hagel's office released this statement:

Hagel and Reed Announce Plans to Join Obama for Bipartisan CODEL to Iraq and Afghanistan Later This Summer

July 13th, 2008 - WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and Chuck Hagel (R-NE) today announced plans to join U.S. Senator Barack Obama in traveling to Iraq and Afghanistan later this summer to get a firsthand look at the security and political situation in these two important countries for American national security. The bipartisan Congressional Delegation (CODEL) plans to meet with top U.S. military commanders and civilians, and senior Iraqi and Afghan leaders. They will also thank our troops, civilians, and coalition partners for their heroic work in extremely difficult circumstances.

In Iraq, the senators will examine whether the tactical buildup of U.S. troops has resulted in the progress necessary to resolve Iraq’s political differences, provide basic services to the Iraqi people, and create long-term stability. In Afghanistan, the senators will assess the U.S.-led efforts to combat the Taliban and expand security in light of the recent rise in violence, while also assessing the political and economic situation.

Senator Reed is a senior member of the Armed Services Committee and will be arranging the logistics for this trip. Senators Obama and Hagel serve on the Foreign Relations Committee.

“I look forward to joining Senators Obama and Reed on this important trip,” said Senator Hagel. “U.S. policies in Iraq and Afghanistan are at the center of America’s national security. These critical issues must be addressed in a bipartisan manner that builds consensus for a bipartisan American foreign policy.”

“This CODEL is a good opportunity to look, listen, and assess recent developments in the region. I am pleased to join Senators Obama and Hagel on this bipartisan fact finding mission. Our troops are performing heroically in Afghanistan and Iraq and doing everything they can to stem the violence. They deserve a policy that is worthy of their sacrifice,” said Senator Reed. “Economic rebuilding and political stability are key components of our operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. We will carefully examine our non-military efforts to bring stability to these places.”

Senator Hagel's speech at the Brookings Institution

Today Senator Hagel delivered a speech to The Brookings Institution, an event described as

"a discussion of U.S. foreign policy in the context of the 2008 presidential campaign. Senator Hagel examined the inventory of global challenges that the next president will inherit and the responsibilities of the presidential candidates to address these challenges."

The speech was titled "Memo to the Candidates." You can read the full text here as a pdf.

The Global Wire

The Global Wire's first episode is an interview with Senator Chuck Hagel. Take a look.

Senator Hagel on The Daily Show

Chuck Hagel was the guest on one of my favorite shows last night, The Daily Show.

"Hagel Statement on Announcement that the U.S., Iran and Syria will Attend Talks in Baghdad"

Chuck Hagel has been urging the President and his administration to engage Iraq's neighbors (particularly Iran and Syria) for three years now. The Iraq Study Group Report released at the end of last year said the same thing. It looks like the President has listened. Here is the press release from Chuck Hagel's Senate website:

Hagel Statement on Announcement that the U.S., Iran and Syria will Attend Talks in Baghdad

February 27th, 2007 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Iraqi Foreign Minister announced today that Iran and Syria will join U.S. and British envoys at a meeting in Baghdad next month to seek ways to stabilize Iraq. U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) has repeatedly called for regional talks to address the situation in Iraq. Hagel released the following statement today in reaction to the announcement:

“This is an important diplomatic initiative taken by the Iraqi government. We will not achieve peace and stability in Iraq without a regional framework that includes Iran and Syria. This conference can be an important first step towards creating that framework,” Hagel said.

"Hagel Speech on U.S.-Iran Relations at the University of Nebraska at Kearney’s Conference on World Affairs"

Senator Hagel gave a speech on Iran yesterday that is well worth a read. Reading this speech reminded me why I do this blog: we need Chuck Hagel, with his wisdom and insight in foreign policy, in the White House. Here are some excerpts:

Forces and events in the Middle East cannot be neatly categorized. The swirl of Middle East history creates layers upon layers of complexity. There is little transparency in the Middle East. That is a reality that is inescapable and cannot be assumed away. To ignore this reality is to risk being trapped by false choices....false choices such as the question, “which is worse – Iran with nuclear weapons or war with Iran?”
...
On Afghanistan, the United States and Iran found common interests – defeating the Taliban and Islamic radicals, stabilizing Afghanistan, stopping the opium production and flow of opium coming into Iran. From these common interests emerged common actions working toward a common purpose. It was in the interests of Iran to work with the U.S. in Afghanistan. It was not a matter of helping America or strengthening America’s presence in Central Asia. It was a clear-eyed and self-serving action for Iran.
...
Two-thirds of Iran’s population is under the age of 30. Iran is undergoing a generational shift that will shape Iran’s outlook...and its opinions of the United States...for decades to come. Iran’s young people use the internet in large numbers, wear American jeans, listen to American music and are positive about America and the West. We do not want to lose this pro-American generation by turning them away from us. They are the hope of Iran. They bristle under the heavy yoke of the Ayatollahs’ strident limitations of personal freedom.
...
it was President Reagan who, in 1986, almost reached an agreement with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev to abolish nuclear weapons. President Reagan understood the need for America to engage...to understand our friends and our adversaries...to explore our options...to identify common interests. President Reagan understood that great powers engage because they are secure in their beliefs and purpose but humble and wise in their policies and actions.
...
We are living today at an historic transformational time in history. The great challenges of the 21st century will require U.S. leadership that is trusted and respected, not feared nor resented. America cannot project only military power. Inspirational leadership and confidence in America's purpose, not imposed power, will be essential for world peace. If we fail, we will lose the next generation in Iran and around the world. This would result in a far more dangerous world than any we have ever known.

The full text is available on his Senate website.

"Global framework must recognize 21st-century realities"

Senator Hagel has a piece in today's Omaha World-Herald that is quite good. It is an excellent example of how Chuck Hagel views the world and sees the interconnectedness of the globe today and how the U.S. must respond to that. You can read it here.

"Leaving Iraq, Honorably"

Senator Chuck Hagel has an op-ed in the Washington Post that is well worth a read. Here is the op-ed:

Leaving Iraq, Honorably

By Chuck Hagel

Sunday, November 26, 2006; Page B07

There will be no victory or defeat for the United States in Iraq. These terms do not reflect the reality of what is going to happen there. The future of Iraq was always going to be determined by the Iraqis -- not the Americans.

Iraq is not a prize to be won or lost. It is part of the ongoing global struggle against instability, brutality, intolerance, extremism and terrorism. There will be no military victory or military solution for Iraq. Former secretary of state Henry Kissinger made this point last weekend.

The time for more U.S. troops in Iraq has passed. We do not have more troops to send and, even if we did, they would not bring a resolution to Iraq. Militaries are built to fight and win wars, not bind together failing nations. We are once again learning a very hard lesson in foreign affairs: America cannot impose a democracy on any nation -- regardless of our noble purpose.

We have misunderstood, misread, misplanned and mismanaged our honorable intentions in Iraq with an arrogant self-delusion reminiscent of Vietnam. Honorable intentions are not policies and plans. Iraq belongs to the 25 million Iraqis who live there. They will decide their fate and form of government.

It may take many years before there is a cohesive political center in Iraq. America's options on this point have always been limited. There will be a new center of gravity in the Middle East that will include Iraq. That process began over the past few days with the Syrians and Iraqis restoring diplomatic relations after 20 years of having no formal communication.

What does this tell us? It tells us that regional powers will fill regional vacuums, and they will move to work in their own self-interest -- without the United States. This is the most encouraging set of actions for the Middle East in years. The Middle East is more combustible today than ever before, and until we are able to lead a renewal of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, mindless destruction and slaughter will continue in Lebanon, Israel and across the Middle East.

We are a long way from a sustained peaceful resolution to the anarchy in Iraq. But this latest set of events is moving the Middle East in the only direction it can go with any hope of lasting progress and peace. The movement will be imperfect, stuttering and difficult.

America finds itself in a dangerous and isolated position in the world. We are perceived as a nation at war with Muslims. Unfortunately, that perception is gaining credibility in the Muslim world and for many years will complicate America's global credibility, purpose and leadership. This debilitating and dangerous perception must be reversed as the world seeks a new geopolitical, trade and economic center that will accommodate the interests of billions of people over the next 25 years. The world will continue to require realistic, clear-headed American leadership -- not an American divine mission.

The United States must begin planning for a phased troop withdrawal from Iraq. The cost of combat in Iraq in terms of American lives, dollars and world standing has been devastating. We've already spent more than $300 billion there to prosecute an almost four-year-old war and are still spending $8 billion per month. The United States has spent more than $500 billion on our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And our effort in Afghanistan continues to deteriorate, partly because we took our focus off the real terrorist threat, which was there, and not in Iraq.

We are destroying our force structure, which took 30 years to build. We've been funding this war dishonestly, mainly through supplemental appropriations, which minimizes responsible congressional oversight and allows the administration to duck tough questions in defending its policies. Congress has abdicated its oversight responsibility in the past four years.

It is not too late. The United States can still extricate itself honorably from an impending disaster in Iraq. The Baker-Hamilton commission gives the president a new opportunity to form a bipartisan consensus to get out of Iraq. If the president fails to build a bipartisan foundation for an exit strategy, America will pay a high price for this blunder -- one that we will have difficulty recovering from in the years ahead.

To squander this moment would be to squander future possibilities for the Middle East and the world. That is what is at stake over the next few months.

The writer is a Republican senator from Nebraska.

A New Direction for U.S. Foreign Policy

A new poll shows that most Americans want a change in U.S. foreign policy. In 2008 the citizens of the United States will still be calling for the repair of our standing in the world. Chuck Hagel is the best person to do just that.

The full article about the poll is quite interesting and enlightening. Check it out.

Seven in Ten Americans Favor Congressional Candidates Who Will Pursue a Major Change in Foreign Policy

U.S. Public Wants Less Emphasis on Military Force, More on Working Through U.N.

A Majority Supports Direct Talks with North Korea and Iran

Going into the November midterm elections, seven in ten Americans say they prefer Congressional candidates who will pursue a new approach to U.S. foreign policy. A new nationwide survey finds a large and growing majority of Americans is dissatisfied with the position of the United States in the world. Most Americans believe that U.S. policies are increasing the threat of terrorist attack and decreasing goodwill toward the United States.

The Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA)/Knowledge Networks poll also finds that large majorities of Americans feel that the United States puts too much emphasis on military force and unilateral action. Most say they want their member of Congress to work to shift the emphasis of U.S. foreign policy in favor of diplomacy, multilateral cooperation, and homeland security.

They also stress the need for programs to reduce the United States’ dependence on oil. When given the opportunity to reshape the foreign policy budget, respondents redistribute spending from military programs to other methods of pursuing security.

Technorati tags: Chuck Hagel, 2008 Election, Foreign Policy

Hagel trip to Asia

Senator Hagel is headed on a trip to multiple Asian nations today. Here is the press release from his Senate Website.

September 28th, 2006 - WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) will travel to Japan, South Korea, Vietnam and Mongolia October 2-11. Hagel will meet with Nebraska troops stationed in South Korea, as well as meet with government, business and other leaders in each country. The purpose of Hagel’s trip will be to discuss regional security, Asia’s economic outlook, and U.S. bilateral relations.

“Our relationships and alliances in Asia are historic, and continue to be critically important to U.S. strategic interests. The U.S. will be affected for years to come by the security, stability and economic development in this region. I look forward to discussing these and other common interests with Asian government and outside leaders, as well as meeting with Nebraska troops serving in the region,” Hagel said.

It is this sort of focus on foreign policy, relationship building, and outlook that the U.S. needs more of today.

Senator Hagel praised by the Episcopal Church

Chuck Hagel was one of two Episcopalian Senators priased by the Episocpal Church for leadership in Middle East peace efforts.

[Episcopal News Service] Two United States senators, Episcopalians Chuck Hagel (Republican-Nebraska) and Lincoln Chafee (Republican-Rhode Island), "are continuing to show extraordinary leadership" on the difficult issues surrounding recent developments in the Middle East, according to Maureen Shea, director of the Episcopal Church's Office of Government Relations.

Hagel and Chafee, who both serve on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, have been independent voices and are raising significant points about the search for Middle East peace and the need for greater leadership by the United States, Shea said.

Shea's remarks were echoed by the Rev. Canon Brian J. Grieves, director of Peace and Justice Ministries for the Episcopal Church. "There's no doubt that a resolution of the Israel/Palestinian conflict will require serious and fair-minded engagement from the United States," Grieves said. "Senators Hagel and Chafee offer hope that sustained U.S. leadership by the Administration will receive support from important members of Congress."

...

Both senators are firm in their commitment to the State of Israel and its security, Shea said. Hagel noted our "special and historic" relationship with Israel but said that relationship "cannot be at the expense of our Arab and Muslim relationships… Achieving a lasting resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict is as much in Israel's interest as any other country in the world."

...

Shea commented that Hagel, a conservative Republican, has consistently questioned the Bush Administration on both the conduct of the war in Iraq and of its Middle East diplomacy. In Hagel's speech, much of which he later repeated on the Senate floor, he called upon President Bush and Rice to be "deeply engaged" in the Middle East and with both Syria and Iran.

"The Middle East need not be a region forever captive to the fire of war and historical hatred," Hagel said. "It can avoid this fate if the United States pursues sustained and engaged leadership worthy of our history, purpose, and power.

Check out the full story here or here.

Your reasons for a Hagel Presidency (Part 2)

Thank you to those people who responded to my question, "Why do you want Chuck Hagel to be our next President?" Please continue to email in your responses to this question. This is another of the answers I received.

Mark writes:

Our foreign policy is taking us into a horrific war against Islam and the East, a war our actions provoked. Hagel has the most perceptive world view and knows the lessons of VietNam and Iraq. He can prevent the coming military draft and expand our influence peacefully instead of shrinking our influence, and population, with a WMD laced VietNam.

So I don't have to move to Costa Rica, I'm voting for Chuck Hagel.

Thanks Mark!

Senator Hagel's Speech at the Brookings Institution

Today Chuck Hagel gave a speech titled “A Defining Time for 21^st Century American Leadership” at the Brookings Institution, a think tank in Washington D.C. My appologies for the length of the post, but the whole speech was worth sharing.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“A Defining Time for 21^st Century American Leadership”

U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel

Remarks as Prepared for Delivery at the Brookings Institution

July 28, 2006

I am honored to be invited to speak here today as a part of the Brookings Institution’s 90^th Anniversary Leadership Forum. Brookings has been at the center of every important policy debate in this country for 90 years. Thank you to Strobe Talbot, Carlos Pascual and all the men and women of Brookings for your continued contributions to our national debate. I see Martin Indyk and Ken Pollack in the audience. Thank you for the fine work you do with the Saban Center for Middle East Policy.

As we recognize the 90^th Anniversary of the Brookings Institution, it is instructive to reflect back on the world of 1916 when Brookings was born...then known as the Institute for Government Research. In 1916, the world was in a period of wrenching and bloody transition. War raged in Europe. It was a war triggered by a series of tragic misjudgements stemming from decades-old resentments and shifting European alliances. It was a war fueled by the Industrial Revolution...the most deadly war the world had ever known. Within one year, the United States would shake-off its historic isolationism and engage in its first global conflict.

The Treaty of Versailles brought an end to the fighting, but it did not bring resolution. The United States retreated from a position of world leadership and back into its shell of irresponsible isolationism...the world economy collapsed, and lingering global resentments continued to heighten. Roughly twenty years later, harsh post-war reparations and arrogant nationalism gave rise to an even deadlier period of global transition: World War II.

America’s leaders following World War II learned from the failed and dangerous polices of the first half of the 20^th century. After World War II, the United States became the indispensable global leader. Along with our allies, we created organizations of global interests and common purpose like the United Nations, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (now the World Trade Organization), NATO, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and dozens of other multilateral institutions. Leaders like Truman, Marshall, Acheson, Hull, Vandenberg and Eisenhower led in the rebuilding of Europe and Japan.

Ninety years after the creation of the Brookings Institution, we live in a different world...but once again a world in transition. The lessons learned after World War II still apply. American leadership is still indispensable in the world...and the institutions and alliances formed after World War II are as vital today as when they were formed.

For decades, the United States used its power and influence to help forge international consensus on vital issues. America’s leadership inspired the trust and confidence of a generation of governments and nations around the world... because we pursued common actions that reflected common interests with our allies...because we remained committed to global engagement...and because we exercised our power with restraint. We made mistakes. It was imperfect. There were differences with our allies. But despite the imperfections and shortcomings, the United States and its allies contributed to world stability and the spread of freedom and prosperity.

Today, the world and America are in deep trouble. In a speech before the Council on Foreign Relations last November, I warned that the world’s trust and confidence in America’s purpose has seriously eroded. America is increasingly not seen as the well-spring of consensus that for decades helped create alliances and coalitions grounded in common objectives and common interests.

This is in contrast to a very troubling trend toward isolationism that is emerging in America today – a trend that was reflected in this week’s New York Times/CBS News poll of Americans about our country’s role in the world. This trend is a looming concern that may not be obvious but is manifest across seemingly unconnected events and issues. We must avoid the trap of limiting our power by allowing ourselves to become isolated in the world. America must not allow itself to become isolated through mindless isolationist remedies to difficult and complicated problems.

In the 1930s, the threat of Adolph Hitler’s Nazi Germany was not taken seriously. Most did not recognize this threat until World War II was upon them. But there was a voice sounding an alarm. Throughout the 1930s, Winston Churchill urged his countrymen and Europe to see the world through the clear lens of reality – not through the blurred lens of misplaced hope. On October 3, 1938, the House of Commons debated the Munich Agreement that Prime Minister Chamberlain had negotiated with Hitler. Many saw this agreement as the assurance of peace with Germany. Churchill disagreed. He said:

“Can we blind ourselves to the great change which has taken place in the military situation, and to the dangers we have to meet? This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigour, we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.”

Today, there is no such threat to world order. Global threats today are less defined than Hitler. However, the challenges are more insidious, more difficult to comprehend and identify, yet more interrelated, more dynamic, and more dangerous. In the 21^st century, we are confronted by a universe of challenges, threats, and opportunities unlike any that we have ever known. The margins of error for miscalculation are less than ever before. Dramatic shifts in security, stability and prosperity can occur in weeks or even days.

On April 16, 1953, President Dwight D. Eisenhower delivered a speech before the American Society of Newspaper Editors that we now know as the “Chance for Peace” speech. In the aftermath of the death and destruction of World War II and the ongoing war in Korea, the world then was confronted with the threat of the Soviet Union and communism. A different time. A different generation. Yet, Eisenhower’s words and wisdom still ring true today. He said,

“No nation's security and well-being can be lastingly achieved in isolation but only in effective cooperation with fellow-nations.”

Just as Eisenhower said in 1953, America’s security, prosperity and freedom cannot be separated from the dangers, challenges, and opportunities abroad. There are no national boundaries from terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, pandemic disease, environmental degradation, and despair. No nation, unilaterally, possesses the power to defeat the threats of the 21^st century. A global society underpinned by a global economy is our world today. The world’s problems and dangers are interconnected. Nowhere are these realities clearer than in the Middle East.

The Middle East is a region in crisis. A continuous and escalating volley of violence has the potential for wider regional and global conflict. Centuries-old religious, ethnic and tribal hatreds and tensions are being manipulated by Islamic extremists for their own unholy purpose. The Middle East is today as combustible and complex as it has ever been. More than fifty percent of the world’s proven oil and natural gas reserves reside in this troubled land...at a time when the world’s six and a half billion people rely on these resources in an interconnected world economy. Uncertain popular support for regime legitimacy continues to weaken governments of the Middle East. Economic stagnation, persistent unemployment, deepening despair and wider unrest enhance the ability of terrorists to recruit and succeed. An Iran with nuclear weapons raises the specter of broader proliferation and a fundamental strategic realignment in the region, creating more regional instability.

America’s approach to the Middle East must be consistent and sustained, and must understand the history, interests and perspectives of our regional friends and allies.

The United States will remain committed to defending Israel. Our relationship with Israel is a special and historic one. But, it need not and cannot be at the expense of our Arab and Muslim relationships. That is an irresponsible and dangerous false choice. Achieving a lasting resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict is as much in Israel’s interest as any other country in the world.

Unending war will continually drain Israel of its human capital, resources, and energy as it fights for its survival. The United States and Israel must understand that it is not in their long-term interests to allow themselves to become isolated in the Middle East and the world. Neither can allow themselves to drift into an “us against the world” global optic or zero-sum game. That would marginalize America’s global leadership, trust and influence, further isolate Israel, and prove to be disastrous for both countries as well as the region.

It is in Israel’s interest, as much as ours, that the United States be seen by all states in the Middle East as fair. This is the currency of trust.

Israel, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories have experienced devastating violence in the last couple of weeks. The world has rightly condemned the despicable actions of Hezbollah and Hamas terrorists who attacked Israel and kidnapped Israeli soldiers. Israel has the undeniable right to defend itself against aggression. This is the right of all states.

Hezbollah is a threat to Israel, to Lebanon and to all who strive for lasting peace in the Middle East. This threat must be dealt with, as Israel’s military operations continue to weaken Hezbollah’s capacity for violence.

However, military action alone will not destroy Hezbollah or Hamas. Extended military action will tear apart Lebanon, destroy its economy and infrastructure, create a humanitarian disaster, further weaken Lebanon’s fragile democratic government, strengthen popular Muslim and Arab support for Hezbollah, and deepen hatred of Israel across the Middle East. The pursuit of tactical military victories at the expense of the core strategic objective of Arab-Israeli peace is a hollow victory. The war against Hezbollah and Hamas will not be won on the battlefield.

To achieve a strategic shift in the conditions for Middle East peace, the United States must use the global condemnation of terrorist acts as the basis for substantive change. For a lasting and popularly supported resolution, only a strong Lebanese government and army, backed by the international community, can rid Lebanon of these corrosive militias and terrorist organizations.

President Bush and Secretary Rice must become and remain deeply engaged in the Middle East. Only U.S. leadership can build a consensus of purpose among our regional and international partners.

The Rome meeting of the Lebanon core group this week must be the beginning of a very intensive diplomatic process – at the highest levels – with the objective of ending the military conflict, securing the Israel-Lebanon border, and invigorating the political track. To lead and sustain U.S. engagement, the President should appoint a statesman of global stature, experience and ability to serve as his personal envoy to the region who would report directly to him and be empowered with the authority to speak and act for the President. Former Secretaries of State Baker and Powell fit this profile.

America must listen carefully to its friends and partners in the region. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and others – countries that understand the Middle East far better than we do – must commit to help resolve today’s crisis and be active partners in helping build a mechanism to move toward realizing the already agreed-upon two-state solution.

A robust international force deployed along the Israel-Lebanon border will be required to facilitate a steady deployment of a strengthened Lebanese Army into southern Lebanon to eventually assume responsibility for security and the rule of law. The UN Security Council should negotiate a new binding resolution that strengthens its demands to disarm militias and to remove Syrian influence from Lebanon that were made in UN Security Council Resolution 1559, and commits the international community to help Lebanon re-build its country.

The core of all challenges in the Middle East remains the underlying Arab-Israeli conflict. The failure to address this root cause will allow Hezbollah, Hamas and other terrorists to continue to sustain popular Muslim and Arab support, continuing to undermine America’s standing in the region, and the governments of Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and others – whose support is critical for any Middle East resolution.

The United States should engage our Middle East and international partners to revive the Beirut Declaration, or some version of it, proposed by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and adopted unanimously by the Arab League in March 2002. In this historic initiative, the Arab world recognized Israel’s right to exist and sought to establish a path toward a two-state solution and broader Arab-Israeli peace. Even though Israel could not accept it as written, it represented a very significant “starting point” document initiated by Arab countries. Today, we need a new Beirut Declaration-type initiative. We squandered the last one.

The concept and intent of the 2002 Beirut Declaration is as relevant today as it was in 2002. An Arab-initiated Beirut-type declaration would re-invest regional Arab states with a stake in achieving progress toward Israeli-Palestinian peace. This type of initiative would offer a positive alternative vision for Arab populations to the ideology and goals of Islamic militants. The United States must explore this approach as part of its diplomatic engagement in the Middle East.

Lasting peace in the Middle East, and stability and security for Israel will come only from a regionally-oriented political settlement.

Former American Middle East Envoy Dennis Ross once observed that in the Middle East a process is necessary because process absorbs events...without a process, events become crises. He was right. Look at where we are today in the Middle East with no process. Crisis diplomacy is no substitute for sustained, day-to-day engagement.

America’s approach to Syria and Iran is inextricably tied to Middle East peace. Whether or not they were directly involved in the latest Hezbollah and Hamas aggression in Israel, both countries exert influence in the region in ways that undermine stability and security. As we work with our friends and allies to deny Syria and Iran any opportunity to further corrode the situation in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories, both Damascus and Tehran must hear from America directly.

As John McLaughlin, the former Deputy Director of Central Intelligence recently wrote in the Washington Post,

“Even superpowers have to talk to bad guys. The absence of a diplomatic relationship with Iran and the deterioration of the one with Syria -- two countries that bear enormous responsibility for the current crisis -- leave the United States with fewer options and levers than might otherwise have been the case. Distasteful as it might have been to have or to maintain open and normal relations with such states, the absence of such relations ensures that we will have more blind spots than we can afford and that we will have to deal through surrogates on issues of vital importance to the United States. We will have to get over the notion that talking to bad guys somehow rewards them or is a sign of weakness. As a superpower, we ought to be able to communicate in a way that signals our strength and self-confidence.”

Ultimately, the United States will need to engage Iran and Syria with an agenda open to all areas of agreement and disagreement. For this dialogue to have any meaning or possible lasting relevance, it should encompass the full agenda of issues.

There is very little good news coming out of Iraq today. Increasingly vicious sectarian violence continues to propel Iraq toward civil war. The U.S. announcement this week to send additional U.S. troops and military police back into Baghdad reverses last month’s decision to have Iraqi forces take the lead in Baghdad...and represents a dramatic set back for the U.S and the Iraqi Government. The Iraqi Government has limited ability to enforce the rule of law in Iraq, especially in Baghdad. Green Zone politics appear to have little bearing or relation to the realities of the rest of Iraq.

The Iraqis will continue to face difficult choices over the future of their country. The day-to-day responsibilities of governing and security will soon have to be assumed by Iraqis. As I said in November, this is not about setting a timeline. This is about understanding the implications of the forces of reality. This reality is being determined by Iraqis – not Americans. America is bogged down in Iraq and this is limiting our diplomatic and military options. The longer America remains in Iraq in its current capacity, the deeper the damage to our force structure – particularly the U.S. Army. And it will continue to place more limitations on an already dangerously over-extended force structure that will further limit our options and public support.

The Cold War, while dangerous, created a fairly stable and mostly predictable world order. That is no longer the case today. The challenges of the 21^st century will be more complex and represent a world of greater degrees of nuance, uncertainty and uncontrollables than those of the last 60 years. America’s policy choices will be more complicated than ever before.

We must be clear in our principles and interests, with friends and foes alike. But framing the world in “absolutes” constrains our ability to build coalitions and alliances, alienates our friends and partners, and results in our own isolation. No country will view its interests as coinciding exactly with ours; nor will countries simply subsume their national interests to maintain relations with America. U.S. policies that are premised on such assumptions will be flawed, with little likelihood for success, and ultimately work against our national interests.

In pursuing our objectives, America must always be mindful of the risks of sudden change and the dangers of unintended consequences. Rarely will America succeed if its actions seek to impose its objectives on others, or achieve change and reform through power alone. America is always strongest when it acts in concert with friends and allies. This approach has enhanced our power and magnified our influence. The Middle East and other regions of the world have been left behind and not experienced the political and economic reform that many other regions have enjoyed in the last 60 years.

The Middle East crisis represents a moment of great danger, but it is also an opportunity. Crisis focuses the minds of leaders and the attention of nations. The Middle East need not be a region forever captive to the fire of war and historical hatred. It will can avoid this fate if the United States pursues sustained and engaged leadership worthy of our history, purpose, and power. America cannot fix every problem in the world – nor should it try. But we must get the big issues and important relationships right and concentrate on those. We know that without engaged and active American leadership the world is more dangerous.

When President Franklin Delano Roosevelt delivered his State of the Union Address on January 6, 1945, he counseled the United States and the world to look beyond the immediate horror of war to the challenges and opportunities that lay ahead. Roosevelt understood the requirements of U.S. leadership and the essence of alliances and partnerships. He said:

“We must not let those differences divide us and blind us to our more important common and continuing interests in winning the war and building the peace. International cooperation on which enduring peace must be based is not a one-way street. Nations like individuals do not always see alike or think alike, and international cooperation and progress are not helped by any nation assuming that it has a monopoly of wisdom or of virtue.”

Over the last 60 years since Roosevelt’s remarks, the United States has been a force for peace and prosperity in the world. Decades of investment in geopolitical security, economic stability, political freedom, innovation and productivity have resulted in a 21^st century of both cooperation and competition. This is a defining time for 21^st Century American leadership. With enlightened American leadership this century offers the world the prospects of unprecedented global peace, prosperity and security...if we are wise enough to sense the moment, engage the world and share a nobility of purpose with all mankind.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technorati tags: Senator Chuck Hagel, Brookings Institution, Middle East, Leadership

Hagel Statement on Japan and U.S. Beef

Senator Hagel's office released this press release today. The reopening of Japan to American beef is an issue that the Senator has been working on for some time, particularly given his constituency and his personal focus on international trade.

Hagel Statement on News Report of Japanese Government’s Decision to Re-Open Japanese Markets to U.S. Beef

July 26th, 2006 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) released the following statement today regarding press reports of the Japanese Government’s decision to be made on Thursday to resume U.S. beef importation following the recently completed inspection of all authorized beef processing plants in the United States:

“I am hopeful that tomorrow will be an important victory for the entire U.S. beef industry. Today’s news reports are encouraging. For two and half years, we have worked to re-open this significant market for Nebraska’s beef producers. We must now work to re-gain the confidence of Japanese consumers until the market has been fully re-opened to all U.S. beef products. U.S. beef is the highest quality, safest beef in the world, and it is critical for Nebraska’s producers to have full access to the Japanese market. I will continue to work with Secretary Johanns to open markets which remain closed to U.S. beef,” Hagel said.

Last week, Senator Hagel met with senior officials from the Japanese Embassy to discuss the resumption of U.S. beef exports into Japan. In May, Senator Hagel met with the Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Aso and Ambassador Kato in Washington, D.C. to discuss the resumption of U.S. beef exports into Japan. On October 28, 2005 Senator Hagel hosted Japanese Ambassador Ryozo Kato on a tour of beef producing and processing plants in Nebraska.

Technorati tags: Senator Chuck Hagel, Japan, Beef

Senator Hagel speaks at the Brookings Institution this Friday

Chuck Hagel will be speaking to the Brookings Institution this Friday at 11 a.m.

On July 28, Senator Chuck Hagel, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations and Select Intelligence committees, will participate in The Brookings Institution's 90th Anniversary Leadership Forum series with an address on U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Chaos continues in the Middle East as Israel confronts attacks by Hezbollah guerrillas from Lebanon, following Israeli incursions into Gaza. Recent events, including Iran's pursuit of nuclear arms, the continued violence and instability in Iraq, Hamas' victory in the Palestinian elections, and talk of further Israeli disengagement from the West Bank, have created new political terrain in the Middle East.

Senator Hagel will discuss the new challenges this presents for U.S. foreign policy and our national security, as well as our relationship with other countries in the Middle East and around the world. He will offer his perspective on the need for a new strategic U.S. thinking, creative diplomacy, and recognition of the varied perspectives and values of other countries.

Chuck Hagel Quote for the Day

“Our foreign policy needs to support our energy, economic, defense and domestic policies. It all falls within the arch of national interest. There will be windows of opportunity, but they will open and close quickly.”

-Chuck Hagel

Hagel Press Release on the Middle East

Senator Hagel's office issued this press release yesterday:

Hagel Statement on the Current Situation in the Middle East

July 14th, 2006 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations and Intelligence Committees, released the following statement today regarding the on-going violence between Israel and Hezbollah in the Middle East:

“We are at a moment of crisis in the Middle East. If the current violence spreads beyond Israel and Lebanon, the consequences for the region and the world are enormous. The instability in Iraq, tensions over Iran’s nuclear program, the rise of terrorism and its support by Syria and Iran, and growing domestic pressure on Arab governments have created dangerous instabilities in the Middle East. In this fragile situation, an escalation of violence could produce a region-wide conflict that engulfs United States and the rest of the world, particularly with the world’s dependence on Middle East energy. The United States must quickly and actively help stabilize and work to de-escalate this dangerously volatile situation. Within this moment of crisis is an opportunity for focused and creative diplomacy. Working with the nations of the region and our allies we can concentrate our efforts to build a stronger consensus against those who support terrorism.

“The United States must show leadership and directly engage this crisis. The President should send someone of global stature, credibility and experience, such as General Colin Powell or former Secretary of State James Baker, to the Middle East to act as his personal envoy. The United States is the only country with the ability to lead a coalition to prevent the region from spiraling out of control,” Hagel said.

Technorati tags: Senator Chuck Hagel, Israel, Middle East

Hagel Resolution on Iran

Here is a press release from Senator Hagel's office: " Hagel Resolution Endorsing Administration Policy on Iran and Calling on Iran to Suspend Nuclear Enrichment Activities Passes Senate"

June 15th, 2006 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senators Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Joseph Biden (D-DE) sponsored a resolution today endorsing the Bush Administration policy on Iran and calling on Iran to fully and verifiably suspend nuclear enrichment and reprocessing activities. The resolution passed the Senate by a vote of 99-0. Below is text from the resolution:

"Congress (1) endorses the policy of the United States, announced May 31, 2006, to achieve a successful diplomatic outcome, in coordination with leading members of the international community, with respect to the threat posed by the efforts of the Iranian regime to acquire a capability to produce nuclear weapons; (2) calls on Iran to suspend fully and verifiably its enrichment and reprocessing activities, cooperate fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency, and enter into negotiations, including with the United States, pursuant to the package presented to Iran by the High Representative of the European Union; and (3) urges the President and Secretary of State to keep Congress fully and currently informed about the progress of this vital diplomatic initiative."

From his official Senate Website

Technorati tags: Senator Chuck Hagel, Iran