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.

Photo - Senator Hagel in Iraq

Senator Obama, General David Petraeus, and Senator Hagel in Iraq

Photo from ABCnews

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.

Chuck Hagel on "Morning Joe" from April 1

Senator Chuck Hagel was on “Morning Joe” on MSNBC yesterday morning speaking about current events, his new book, and the Presidential election. 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.

Veterans group praises Hagel on Iraq votes

Southwest Nebraska News reports that there is a new radio ad praising Senator Hagel ("Hagel, other Republicans Commended in Radio Ads").

Major General (Ret.) John Batiste, former 1st Infantry Division commander in Iraq, life-long Republican, and advisor to VoteVets.org, is featured in a new radio ad campaign being launched today, that praises three Republicans for standing up for the troops.

Here is the text of the ad being run in Nebraska:

"I first want to thank the great state of Nebraska for standing behind our great military. When I was in uniform, my duty was to get the job done, without commenting on the policy makers in Washington. Now I'm a civilian, and pleased to thank Senator Chuck Hagel for his moral courage and standing up for our troops and military families. We're caught in the middle of a brutal civil war in Iraq, without a focused national strategy. Senator Hagel is well-informed, challenging those politicians who are breaking our great Army and Marine corps. Right now our soldiers and marines are killing and dying in Iraq, despite the fact that the Iraqis are no closer to reconciliation, and the current government is ineffective. Policy-makers need people like Senator Hagel, standing up for our troops, their families, and our national security."

There have been many veterans that have expressed their support for Senator Hagel and the trend will no doubt continue. You can listen to the ad here, or at VoteVets.org.

Lincoln Journal Star: "Hagel: Congress demands facts on Iraq"

Don Walton had a piece in Friday's Lincoln Journal Star covering Hagel's latest on the Iraq war. Check out the full article for more.

“We’re going to demand we get whatever information we require,” the Republican senator said during a Lincoln interview. “We fully expect the leaders of our government will comply with their responsibility. We must have all the facts and details required to make intelligent decisions.”

Hagel on Meet the Press

Chuck Hagel was on Meet the Press on July 8th, 2007. Here is the video:

Financial Times - "Internationalize Iraq"

Senator Hagel had a piece, Internationalize Iraq, in the Financial Times on July 3rd, 2007. Once again, Chuck Hagel clearly and articulately lays out his views on how the United States should approach Iraq. The piece is well worth a read.

Press Release catch up

Here are some of the press releases you may have missed:

Senate Passes “Wounded Warriors Act”

Hagel’s International Mediator Language Included in Levin-Reed Amendment on Iraq War Policy

Hagel-Levin Introduce Amendment to Protect U.S. Military Deployment Standards

Hagel Introduces Comprehensive Amendment on U.S. Iraq War Policy

Hagel Introduces Comprehensive Energy Reform Legislation

For a full listing of the press releases from Chuck Hagel's Senate office, see his Senate website.

Monday's Novak Article

Robert Novak had a piece out yesterday, "Hagel's Stand." It is well worth the read. Here are some excerpts:

Hagel certainly is no peace-now zealot. "We're not going to precipitously pull out," he told me. "We have [national] interests in Iraq." While he asserted that "we can't get out by the end of the year," he called for "pulling some of our guys out -- not all of them, but you've got to get them out of [Baghdad] at least, get them out of the middle of civil war." If not, Hagel said, "then the prospects of the Republican Party are very dim next year."

What about claims by proponents of the Iraqi intervention that failure to stop the terrorists in Iraq will open the door to them in the American homeland?

"That's nonsense," Hagel replied. "I've never believed that. That's the same kind of rhetoric and thinking that neocons used to get us into this mess and everything that [Donald] Rumsfeld, [Paul] Wolfowitz, [Richard] Perle, [Douglas] Feith and the vice president all said. Nothing turned out the way they said it would."

It is "nonsense," Hagel said, because "Iraq is not embroiled in a terrorist war today." Hagel, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, cited "national intelligence" attributing "maybe 10 percent" of the insurgency and violence to al-Qaeda. Indeed, he described Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds as opposed to al-Qaeda: "They don't like the terrorists. What's happened in Anbar province is the tribes are finally starting to connect with us because al-Qaeda started killing some of their leadership and threatening their people. So the tribes now are at war with al-Qaeda."

...

These judgments come from someone credited with rebuilding Nebraska's Republican Party and who has earned a lifetime conservative voting rating of 85.2 percent from the American Conservative Union. Hagel represents millions of Republicans who are repelled by the Democrats' personal assault on President Bush but are deeply unhappy about his course in Iraq.

Press release: "Hagel Statement on Vote in Favor of War Supplemental Spending Bill"

The second of two press releases today from the Senate office of Chuck Hagel:

Hagel Statement on Vote in Favor of War Supplemental Spending Bill

April 26th, 2007 - Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) released the following statement today regarding his vote in favor of the Iraq War Supplemental spending bill:

“I do not believe the current policy we have in Iraq is worthy of the sacrifices our troops are making and I will not continue to support it. Given a choice between the two options of voting for this bill or supporting the current course we are on in Iraq, I chose to vote for this bill. We need a change of policy.

“The President will veto this legislation and we will find ourselves at a crossroads. The Administration and Congress must find a responsible common ground on a new Iraq policy that funds our troops, strips the unnecessary spending out of this bill, addresses our national interests in Iraq and the Middle East, and presses the Iraqi government to find a political accommodation and make the tough choices they need to make in order to govern and defend their country. This is a time for responsible government and far-sighted leadership. We cannot and will not continue to be an occupying presence in Iraq,” Hagel said.

Hagel's op-ed in today's Washington Post

Senator Hagel wrote an op-ed that is in today's Washington Post. This piece is the result of his recent trip to Iraq.

In Iraq, All Terribly Familiar

By Chuck Hagel

Sunday, April 22, 2007; Page B01

Last weekend, along with Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.), I completed my fifth trip to Iraq, and I am frustrated and worried. We are still risking the lives of our troops without giving them a realistic policy worthy of their sacrifices. To me, as a Vietnam veteran, that feels terribly familiar.

If success were simply a matter of the determination and ability of U.S. troops and civil servants, we would have already created a secure and stable Iraq. But unfortunately, the reality is that after more than four years, America remains the country's occupying power. Iraq's future will be determined by Iraqis, who, I hope, will reach a political accommodation -- but America is still making the major decisions and taking the lead militarily in most critical areas of the country. We can continue to help buy time for the Iraqi government -- but that time is running out.

The signs are everywhere. Key Shiite leaders told me that they remain deeply skeptical of Sunni intentions. They derided as "appeasement" constructive attempts to reintegrate select ex-Baath Party officials into public life and the government. Shiite and Kurdish leaders openly suggested that Iraq simply pursue what's known as "the 80/20 solution" -- meaning that the Kurds and Shiites, who make up some 80 percent of the population, would run the country without regard for the minority Sunnis, who had grown accustomed to dominating Iraq. Almost no one in Baghdad was talking about using new provincial elections this year to help bring the Sunnis into the national government. The governor of Anbar province, al-Qaeda's base in Iraq, agreed that security had improved recently but raised concerns that his province still gets almost no assistance from the central government in Baghdad. That has left citizens in his province without jobs, electricity and potable water, even as open sewers spill filth into the streets.

There are important areas of progress in Iraq, and we should recognize them. In Anbar province, for example, U.S. military leaders highlighted the significant success they have had in lowering the number of attacks by al-Qaeda. The military has successfully engaged tribal leaders who have provided informal governance there for hundreds of years. The U.S. military has also succeeded in helping double the size of the Iraqi forces in the province. Whether this progress can be sustained or is temporary will be up to the Iraqis.

If the good news is mixed, the bad news is downright troubling. Within the past two weeks, hundreds of Iraqis were slaughtered in Baghdad, the Iraqi Parliament's cafeteria was hit by a suicide bomber, and a historic Baghdad bridge over the Tigris River was destroyed. Ominously, these increased acts of violence occurred in the area where the United States and Iraq have deployed 80,000 security forces.

So what do we do?

We must start by understanding what's really happening in Iraq. According to the National Intelligence Estimate released in February, the conflict has become a "self-sustaining inter-sectarian struggle between Shia and Sunnis" and also includes "extensive Shia-on-Shia violence." This means that Iraq is being consumed by sectarian warfare, much of it driven by Shiite or Sunni militias -- not al-Qaeda terrorists. Yes, there are admirers of Osama bin Laden in the country, including a full-blown al-Qaeda branch. But terrorists are not the core problem; Sunni-Shiite violence is. The Bush administration's rhetoric has not been nearly clear enough on this key point.

American occupation cannot stop a civil war in Iraq. Our military, superb as it is, can only do so much. The only lasting answer to Iraq's anguish will come from a political resolution. There will be no military solution in Iraq.

So how can America influence the Iraqis to reconcile their differences -- at least enough to form some kind of responsible government?

First, we must recognize that we have few good options in Iraq and that we are dealing with dynamics that lie mostly beyond our control.

Second, we must do all we can to encourage a comprehensive regional security framework, which includes engaging Syria and Iran. The regional security conference next month in Egypt is an opportunity we must not miss. We cannot solve the problems in Iraq by ourselves. We will have to work more closely with our Middle East allies than ever before, and that means addressing the nearly universal perception in the Middle East that we are imposing our will on the region for our own purposes.

To get more help from our regional friends, we must also have Middle Eastern countries see the Iraqi government as credible, not a U.S. puppet. And to get our regional strategy right, we must clearly recognize the depth of the Sunni-Shiite split and factor it into our Middle East policy and relationships. If we do not, the region could explode into ethnic and religious conflict.

Third, and closer to home, the administration and Congress must untangle themselves from the debate over funding our continued involvement in Iraq. The Iraqis must be jolted into understanding that America's continued commitment of troops and money is not open-ended. Significantly, American leaders in Iraq told me that they believed the debate on this issue in Congress had actually helped them get Iraqi leaders to grasp this point.

I do not like restricting our war policy with conditions or timelines. They are blunt instruments in an area of policy that requires flexibility. But they are some of the few levers Congress has when the majority of Congress and the American people have lost confidence in the president's policy.

We are at a crossroads at home. One option is that Congress can pass and the president can sign a war-funding bill that gives our troops the resources they need and places responsible conditions on that funding that will press the Iraqi government to perform and make the tough choices. President Bush should not see this as a threat from Congress but as a reasonable progression of events after four bloody and costly years.

The other option is that the president can veto the funding bill, Congress can overplay its hand, and both sides can get locked into a political standoff -- with U.S. troops caught in the middle. This would not produce constructive pressure on the Iraqi government to reconcile its differences, and it would ensure that the United States would remain trapped in Iraq, doing ever-greater damage to our force structure and military capabilities. The longer we are bogged down in Iraq, the more difficult and painful it will be to get out. And the deeper we are bogged down in Iraq, the fewer resources we have to devote to the many other important challenges facing America, especially in Afghanistan but also elsewhere around the globe and here at home.

If the war continues to lose support from the American people, the limited options we have today will vanish. The president will be left with a bitter few allies in our party, and we will be forced to withdraw from Iraq in a way that greatly damages U.S. interests in the Middle East and leaves the world far more dangerous than it is today. Forging a bipartisan consensus now that places responsible conditions on U.S. war funding could forestall a time when we have no options. The Baker-Hamilton report could have been the base for that bipartisan consensus.

I came home from my fifth trip to Iraq with one enduring impression. The Iraqi government must make the tough choices now to produce political reconciliation. If there is no such reconciliation in Iraq, there will be no progress -- no matter how many American lives we lose and how much American money we give. We will have squandered our resources and efforts, undermined our interests in the Middle East and, however unintentionally, produced a more dangerous world.

Chuck Hagel, a Republican, is a U.S. senator from Nebraska.

Hagel to travel to Iraq again

Senator Hagel will be traveling to Iraq for the fifth time. The full details are in this press release that his Senate office issued today.

Hagel, Sestak to Travel to Iraq

April 12th, 2007 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Congressman Joe Sestak (D-PA) will travel to Iraq this week to examine security, political and economic conditions during a 2-day tour of the country. Senator Hagel and Congressman Sestak will leave on Thursday, April 12th and return on Monday, April 16th. Hagel, a Vietnam War veteran, serves on the Senate Foreign Relations and Intelligence Committees. Sestak, a retired U.S. Navy Vice Admiral, serves on the House Armed Services Committee.

“This trip will allow us an opportunity to assess our progress in Iraq and the Middle East and meet with the key leaders of this region. I also look forward to meeting with Nebraska troops serving in Iraq,” Hagel said.

“I appreciate the opportunity to talk with our commanders and the troops that are forward in a continuing assessment of our involvement in Iraq," stated Congressman Joe Sestak. “I am confident that I will be able to use this experience in my work on the House Armed Services Committee and in Congress.”

Hagel and Sestak are scheduled to meet with top U.S. and Iraqi military, government, and diplomatic officials. Hagel will also meet with Nebraska troops serving in the country.

Hagel last traveled to Iraq and the Middle East in December 2005. This will be his fifth visit to Iraq.

Press Release: "Hagel Statement on Secretary Gates’ Announcement Extending Army Deployments from 12 to 15 Months"

Here's a press release from Chuck Hagel's Senate office that was released yesterday:

Hagel Statement on Secretary Gates’ Announcement Extending Army Deployments from 12 to 15 Months

April 11th, 2007 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) released the following statement today regarding Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ announcement that U.S. Army deployments will be extended from 12 to 15 months:

“Secretary Gates is right to bring greater predictability and clarity regarding the deployment of our military overseas rather than allowing creeping deployment extensions. However, the Secretary’s announcement extending the deployments of active duty Army units is a stark admission that the Administration’s policies in Iraq are doing permanent damage to our military and a clear acknowledgment that the U.S. military is being forced to ignore its own deployment standards. Maintaining this tempo of operations will have drastic and lasting consequences for our nation’s military readiness and unnecessarily endangers our ability to react to any other crisis in the world. We are on a very dangerous course. That is why Senator Webb and I have called for legislatively-mandated readiness and deployment standards to protect our U.S. military.”

Three new speeches/statements

Chuck Hagel's Senate website has some new material up that's worth checking out:
"Hagel Floor Statement on Iraq War Resolution -- February 12, 2007"
"Hagel Floor Statement on Iraq War Resolution -- February 5, 2007"
"Hagel Charter Day Speech at the College of William and Mary"

Thanks to Andy for the tip.

A few articles on last night's letter

There are a number of articles out there today about the letter from seven Senate Republicans (see the previous post for the letter).

There's one at the Washington Post. I did want to share this quote from the article:

A top Pentagon leader weighed in yesterday on the war debate and appeared to undercut the argument advanced by the White House and many GOP lawmakers that a congressional debate challenging the Bush plan would hurt troop morale.

"There's no doubt in my mind that the dialogue here in Washington strengthens our democracy. Period," Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified before the House Armed Services Committee.

There are also related articles at the Lincoln Journal Star and The Omaha World-Herald.

Letter regarding the recent Iraq resolution

There has been some confusion as to why Senators Warner and Hagel (and others) voted the way they did regarding the debate over the resolutions in the Senate. Tonight there has been some light shed on that. The Washington Note as a piece on it (including a pdf of the letter) and this article covers the issue as well.

Here is the text of the letter (from The Washington Note):

February 7, 2007

The Honorable Harry Reid, Majority Leader

The Honorable Mitch McConnell, Republican Leader

The Honorable Richard Durbin, Assistant Majority Leader

The Honorable Trent Lott, Assistant Republican Leader

United States Senate -- Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Leader Reid, Leader McConnell, Senator Durbin and Senator Lott:

The war in Iraq is the most pressing issue of our time. It urgently deserves the attention of the full Senate and a full debate on the Senate floor without delay.

We respectfully advise you, our leaders, that we intend to take S. Con. Res 7 and offer it, where possible under the Standing Rules of the Senate, to bills coming before the Senate.

On January 10,2007, the President stated, with respect to his Iraq strategy, "if Members have improvements that can be made, we will make them. If circumstances change we will adjust." In a conscientious, respectful way, we offered our resolution consistent with the President's statement.

We strongly believe the Senate should be allowed to work its will on our resolution as well as the concepts brought forward by other Senators. Monday's procedural vote should not be interpreted as any lessening of our resolve to go forward advocating the concepts of S. Con. Res. 7.

We will explore all of our options under the Senate procedures and practices to ensure a full and open debate on the Senate floor. The current stalemate is unacceptable to us and to the people of this country.

Sincerely,

Olympia Snowe

John Warner

Chuck Hagel

Susan Collins

Norm Coleman

Gordon Smith

George Voinovich

Interesting indeed.

Video of Chuck Hagel on the Senate Floor

Here's a video of Senator Hagel from this week on the debate of the non-binding resolution. Take a look.