[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Pages 786-787]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                            HAGEL NOMINATION

  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, the nomination of Chuck Hagel to be the 
next Secretary of Defense has already done damage to the credibility of 
the United States in its attempt to deny Iran a nuclear weapon, thus 
emboldening one of the most dangerous regimes in the Middle East. To 
limit that damage, President Obama should choose someone else to lead 
the Pentagon.
  After all, the Nebraska Senator is the same person who has 
consistently opposed sanctions against Iran. He is the same person who 
wanted Washington to support Iranian membership in the World Trade 
Organization. He is the same person who voted against designating the 
Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist group at a time when 
it was orchestrating the murder of U.S. troops in Iraq.
  He is the same person who refused to sign a letter asking the 
European Union to label Hezbollah--an Iranian proxy--as a terror group, 
even though it is so designated by the U.S. State Department. He is the 
same person who urged President Bush to offer Iran ``direct, 
unconditional, and comprehensive talks.'' He is the same person who 
called for establishing a U.S. diplomatic mission in Tehran.
  He is the same person who dismissed ``a military strike against 
Iran'' as ``not a viable, feasible, responsible option.'' And he is the 
same person who suggested that the United States might be able to live 
with a nuclear Iran.
  During his years in this Chamber, Senator Hagel's opposition to Iran 
sanctions placed him in a very small minority. For example, only one 
other Senator joined him in voting against sanctions in 2001, and only 
one other Senate Banking Committee member joined him in rejecting a 
different sanctions package in 2008.
  Simply put, Senator Hagel has no credibility on perhaps the biggest 
foreign policy challenge facing the Obama administration's second term 
and on American national security interests in the Middle East and 
around the world.
  Consider how his nomination was interpreted by Iranian journalists 
and government officials. Press TV, a Tehran-based propaganda network, 
noted with satisfaction that Senator Hagel is known for ``his criticism 
of Washington's anti-Iran policies'' and ``has consistently opposed any 
plan to launch [a] military strike against Iran.''
  The point is, not that we should be threatening military strikes 
against Iran, but to take this off the table entirely completely 
undercuts any diplomatic efforts we might take to deny Iran a nuclear 
weapon.
  Meanwhile, a spokesman for the Iranian foreign ministry responded to 
the Hagel announcement by declaring:

       We hope that practical changes will be created in the U.S. 
     foreign policy and . . . that the U.S. officials will favor 
     peace instead of warmongering.

  The Iranians are claiming we are the ones warmongering, while they 
are building a nuclear weapon.
  Just for good measure, the Al Jazeera Web site published an article 
headlined: ``Obama defeats the Israel Lobby.'' Is this really the 
impression we want to give our adversaries and our allies in the Middle 
East? Is this how we encourage our friends, to say we will be there to 
support our allies? Is this the message we want to convey to our 
adversaries such as Iran, that has threatened the annihilation of 
Israel, to wipe it off the map? Unfortunately, that is the message that 
is conveyed by the nomination of Senator Hagel as Secretary of Defense.
  Not only has Senator Hagel been a persistent critic of Iran 
sanctions, he has also displayed a stubborn hostility toward America's 
closest Middle Eastern ally.
  In October 2000, shortly after Yasser Arafat launched the second 
Intifada, 96 Senators signed a letter to President Clinton affirming 
their solidarity with Israel. Senator Hagel was not among them. Six 
months later, after a relentless onslaught of Palestinian terrorism, 87 
Senators signed a different letter asking President Bush to ``initiate 
a reassessment of our relations with the Palestinians.'' Once again, 
Senator Hagel refused to sign. He also refused to join 89 other 
Senators in signing a November 2001 letter that urged President Bush to 
maintain strong support for Israel and to continue snubbing Arafat 
until the Palestinian leader ended his terror campaign.
  On April 12, 2002, a Palestinian suicide bomber killed 6 people and 
injured more than 100 others in Jerusalem. That same day, Senator Hagel 
went to the Senate floor and suggested a moral equivalence between 
Palestinian terrorism and Israeli self-defense.
  Three months later, he published an article in the Washington Post 
bemoaning ``the endless cycle of violence'' and declaring that ``Israel 
must take steps to show its commitment to peace.''
  In a 2003 interview with a local newspaper in Lincoln, NE, Senator 
Hagel ratcheted up his rhetoric even further, saying the Israelis 
``keep Palestinians caged up like animals.''
  In 2009, Senator Hagel coauthored a policy paper that advised 
President Obama to pursue a dialog with Hamas--again, a State 
Department-designated terrorist organization; Iran's primary proxy in 
the area. More specifically, the paper recommended that Washington 
``offer [Hamas] inducements that will enable its more moderate elements 
to prevail, and cease discouraging third parties from engaging with 
Hamas in ways that might help clarify the movement's views and test its 
behavior.''
  Most of us believe, including the U.S. State Department, that Hamas' 
views and behavior are already clear enough: It is committed to the 
annihilation of Israel; it fires rockets and Iranian-made missiles at 
civilian areas; and it indoctrinates Palestinian children in a culture 
of hatred and violence.
  Of course, Senator Hagel's most famous comments--or I should say 
infamous comments--on Israel were delivered during a 2006 interview 
with former Clinton administration official Aaron David Miller. In that 
interview, Senator Hagel said ``the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of 
people up here.'' These remarks are deeply offensive, but they are also 
quite revealing, for they confirm that he simply does not understand 
the true basis of the U.S.-Israeli alliance.
  The American people and their elected representatives support Israel 
for obvious reasons: Both of our countries are pluralistic democracies 
with a shared commitment to liberty, equality, and basic human rights; 
both of

[[Page 787]]

our countries are threatened by radical Islam; and both of our 
countries have responded to that threat while remaining free and open 
societies.
  In other words, we have an alliance based on shared values and a 
common determination to defend liberal democracy against terrorists and 
dictators alike.
  I realize Senator Hagel is now repudiating many of his past actions 
and statements, but we have seen this before, unfortunately: 
individuals approaching the confirmation process undergoing a seeming 
transformation. But this sudden and convenient transformation beggars 
belief. Senator Hagel has not undergone an abrupt ideological makeover; 
he just wants to win approval from Members of this Chamber in what we 
might call a ``confirmation conversion.''
  Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. HOEVEN. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum 
call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________