|
The new 'Obama advisor' problem: Senator Chuck Hagel
The Republican Jewish Coalition was able to cleverly attack Senator Barack Obama by using the positions of its arch-rival, the National Jewish Democratic Council. Obama is taking Senator Chuck Hagel, a Republican, to his Middle East tour.
Here is what the Jewish Democrats said about Hagel in March 2007:
As Senator Hagel sits around for six more months and tries to decide whether to launch a futile bid for the White House, he has a lot of questions to answer about his commitment to Israel. Consider this:
In August 2006, Hagel was one of only 12 Senators who refused to write the EU asking them to declare Hezbollah a terrorist organization.
In October 2000, Hagel was one of only 4 Senators who refused to sign a Senate letter in support of Israel.
In November 2001, Hagel was one of only 11 Senators who refused to sign a letter urging President Bush not to meet with the late Yassir Arafat until his forces ended the violence against Israel.
In December 2005, Hagel was one of only 27 who refused to sign a letter to President Bush to pressure the Palestinian Authority to ban terrorist groups from participating in Palestinian legislative elections.
In June 2004, Hagel refused to sign a letter urging President Bush to highlight Iran's nuclear program at the G-8 summit.
Here's what the National Review wrote about Hagel's stance on Israel in 2002:
"There's nothing Hagel likes less than talking about right and wrong in the context of foreign policy. Pro-Israeli groups view him almost uniformly as a problem. 'He doesn't always cast bad votes, but he always says the wrong thing,' comments an Israel supporter who watches Congress. An April speech is a case in point. 'We will need a wider lens to grasp the complex nature and consequences of terrorism,' said Hagel. He went on to cite a few examples of terrorism: FARC in Colombia, Abu Sayyaf in the Philippines, and the Palestinian suicide bombers. Then he continued, 'Arabs and Palestinians view the civilian casualties resulting from Israeli military occupation as terrorism.' He didn't exactly say he shares this view - but he also failed to reject it."
And here's what the anti-Israel group, CAIR, wrote in praise of Hagel:
"Potential presidential candidates for 2008, like Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Joe Biden and Newt Gingrich, were falling all over themselves to express their support for Israel. The only exception to that rule was Senator Chuck Hagel ?" [Council on American-Islamic Relations, 8/28/06]
Our Israel Factor panel was also suspicious of Hagel, as you can see here.
"Here is a possibility that will confront the panel with a fascinating dilemma: At the beginning of the week, the Republican senator from Nebraska, Chuck Hagel, hinted that there is still a possibility he will run. If he decides to do so, he might enter the race as an independent. He has received the lowest score from the panel for many months; one panelist explains that this is because he is 'multilateral in his international approach.'"
Others offer similar reasons: "He has a simplistic concept of foreign policy and the Middle East," and "he is the least sympathetic to Israel," "his cold attitude toward Israel," and "he is ready to accept countries that support terrorism."
Hagel, who does not conform to the Republican line, is one of the fiercest critics of the Bush administration. In the panel's perception, his attitude toward Israel will be closer to that of the first president Bush than the second.
To their defense, the NJDC will probably point to the fact that Hagel is not coming to Israel, and is only going with Obama to Iraq as part of a congressional delegation. Thus, demanding that Obama disinvite Hagel from the Israel trip - that's essentially what the RJC wanted - is irrelevant.
It is also somewhat strange that the RJC has suddenly decided to criticize Hagel now. Where has it been the last 15 years and why wasn't it saying something about his positions when he was still an influential Republican senator, and not a lame duck Republican dissident.
However, the RJC has a valid point to make; it is pretty clear that Obama wanted Hagel with him in Iraq, so the question of their alliance and its meaning to those concerned with Hagel's positions on Israel remains. If Hagel is seen as a valuable foreign policy advisor, some pro-Israel voters might legitimately feel less comfortable with the Obama campaign.
Going back to the judgment of the Factor panel, here's what happened when we asked about the possibility (there was such possibility, a long time ago) of a Bloomberg-Hagel ticket:
Here the answer is clear: If Bloomberg takes Hagel with him, the panel will no longer think he is a candidate favorable to Israel. Five of the panelists said such a move will make them very uneasy with Bloomberg. Three of the panelists said it would not matter - but not one said it would make Bloomberg more appealing.
|
