• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Hagel’s Dialectic on Iran: Confusion and Illusion

    Fang Zhe/Xinhua/Photoshot/Newscom

    Former Senator Chuck Hagel (R–NE) repeatedly fumbled his responses on important Middle East security questions at his confirmation hearing this week.

    He sought to sidestep Senator John McCain’s (R–AZ) question about whether the surge of U.S.troops in Iraq succeeded. Although he had opposed the troop surge and denounced it at the time as the “most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam,” he replied weakly that “I’ll defer that judgment to history.” McCain bristled and shot back: “I think history has already made a judgment about the surge, sir, and you’re on the wrong side of it.”

    Hagel is also on the wrong side of history when it comes to Iran. He remains committed to unconditional engagement with a regime that has contemptuously spurned the efforts of the Obama Administration to engage it in negotiations over the last four years. It would have been interesting to hear him answer a question about why the Administration’s engagement policy has failed to yield results.

    Hagel also stumbled in replying to a question on Iran by Senator Saxby Chambliss (R–GA): “I support the President’s strong position on containment, as I have said.” Later, though, he was passed a note from an aide and offered a correction: “I misspoke and said I supported the President’s position on containment. If I said that, I meant to say we don’t have a position on containment.” Senator Carl Levin (D–MI) corrected him, saying, “We do have a position on containment, and that is we do not favor containment.” Levin added: “I just wanted to clarify the clarify.”

    It is disturbing that the nominee not only misstated his own position but also apparently fails to grasp the Administration’s stand on such an important issue. Preventing Iran from attaining a nuclear weapon is clearly preferable to the difficult and risky policy of trying to contain a nuclear Iran.

    Hagel also stumbled badly in response to a question about why he voted against designating Iran’s Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist organization. Despite its long and well-documented involvement in terrorist attacks, Hagel maintained that it would be a mistake to single out a branch of “an elected, legitimate government.”

    Although he subsequently admitted that he should have said “recognized” rather than “legitimate,” the fact that he mistakenly sees the dictatorship in Tehran as an elected government and glosses over the baleful role of the Revolutionary Guards in orchestrating terrorism raises serious questions about his judgment and knowledge about Iran.

    See also: Hagel, Kerry, and Brennan Confirmation Hearings: Middle East and North Africa Issues.

    Posted in Security [slideshow_deploy]

    Comments are closed.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×