The problem with Chuck Hagel

Former Nebraska Senator, Republican Chuck Hagel The potential nomination of former Senator of Nebraska Chuck Hagel has pretty much gotten out of control.

In quintessential strange bedfellows mode, we can find Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall, Glenn Greenwald and Pat Buchanan (now reduced to posting at World Net Daily where he belongs) defending Hagel from what they see as unfair attacks from the right on his views on Israel. It is probably correct that the Israel objections from the terrible trio of Sens. McCain, Graham and Lieberman and others are unfair, but it doesn't mean objections to the man are incorrect. (See: broken clock.)

Objections from the right have now totally eclipsed those from the left, but Markos Moulitsas spoke for many when he said on Dec 14 "No Republicans at Defense":

Hagel is a Republican who voted for all of George W. Bush's pet wars. .... And yes, while he has reneged on his past support for our nation's disastrous wars, there are plenty of good qualified Democrats who weren't idiotic enough to support them in the first place.

It's time for Democrats to embrace the fact that yes, they know what the hell they're doing on matters of national security.

Markos kicked off a campaign to raise progressive objections to Hagel. And it is very strange that Obama pretty clearly won the foreign policy and national security debate, and yet, does not seem inclined to grant his party the mantel of leadership on those issues.

The right's Israel-based objections seem to fit a constant and tiresome Republican talking point. Way back in 2008 primaries, The Weekly Standard wrote about "Obama's Jewish Problem", the New York Times and numerous other outlets did that year as well. And it gets trotted out with great regularity including this cycle, like this from CNN. The trouble with this stubborn meme is it refuses to actually manifest itself in any measurable way. The Jews stubbornly continue to vote for Obama by overwhelming super-majorities.

On issues of Obama's supposed lack of support for Israel, the right wing appears to be in an endless chorus of crying "Wolf!" Hagel has just become the latest focus of that trope.

The whole dust-up seems to endow a lot more power in the Def Sec to set policy than he probably has. Sure, he's an influential voice in the national security and foreign policy team. But the inertia on America's Israel policy comes from Congress, lobbyists--both foreign policy and military. There's also the "conventional wisdom" that informs every beltway bloviator, who are able to create a self-fulfilling reality. And the inertia of many, many decades probably doesn't leave a lot of room for any single player to move the needle too dramatically. I'm not convinced any president has much latitude. What is this supposed outcome, Israel is attacked and America shrugs? We stop sending foreign aid? We stop sharing intelligence and arms? None of this is going to happen no matter who is Def Sec.

The Def Sec has far more unilateral latitude to influence internal policies of the military than bigger picture stuff like Afghanistan and Israel foreign policy, which require massive coalitions to change course, and these coalitions can be built more easily and effectively directly from the White House. And on some of the major issues being debated in military circles, Hagel has proved himself over his long career to be no friend to those constituencies, to put it mildly.

(Continue reading below the fold.)