[Peace-discuss] Stephen Kinzer: Chuck Hagel's big problem: being a realist about American power and Iran

[Robert Naiman]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/31/chuck-hagel-big-problem-realist-iran

 Chuck Hagel's big problem: being a realist about American power and Iran

The former Nebraska senator faces fierce opposition to possible nomination
as defense secretary from Washington's militarists


   -
      - Stephen Kinzer <http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/stephenkinzer>
      - guardian.co.uk <http://www.guardian.co.uk/>, Monday 31 December
      2012 11.30 EST

What do Nebraska <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/nebraska> and
Iran<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/iran> have
in common? Not much – but enough to cause big trouble for former Nebraska
Senator Chuck Hagel, whose possible nomination to be secretary of defense
is being challenged by the powerful bomb-Iran-yesterday lobby.

Iran, in its former incarnation as Persia, created the world's first
empire, produced titanic figures like Cyrus, Darius, and Xerxes, and is one
of the great fonts of world culture. Nebraska was home to indigenous
peoples for centuries. It became a state in 1867, and has produced an
important literary figure, Willa Cather, as well as an investor said to be
the world's second richest man, Warren Buffett.

Nebraska also, however, produced fighters long before Chuck Hagel emerged.
Crazy Horse, "Wild Bill" Cody, and General John Pershing were born there.

A group called Nebraskans for Peace has spent years waging a campaign
against the US Strategic Command, which controls America's strategic
arsenal from a base in Omaha. The current headline on its website
is<http://nebraskansforpeace.org/>,
"Don't Bomb Iran."

Here is the heart of the case against Senator Hagel's nomination.

Militarists in Washington, taking their cue from pro-Israel lobbyists, are
trying to derail the
appointment<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/22/hagel-zero-dark-thirty-msnbc>
because
Hagel doubts the wisdom of starting another war in the Middle East. Their
evidence is his assertion, made several years
ago<http://thinkprogress.org/security/2006/04/13/4825/hagel-iran/>,
that:

"A military strike against Iran, a military option, is not a viable,
feasible, responsible option."

 Hagel is absolutely correct. Like many thoughtful Americans, including
some of our country's most seasoned diplomats, he is eager to make a real
effort to engage Iran. No American president has done that since Jimmy
Carter's presidency was immolated in the wake of the hostage crisis –
except for Ronald Reagan, who tried sending Iranian leaders a cake and a
Bible, to no avail.

Part of what has led Hagel to recommend a calm, reasoned, prudent approach
to Iran is his own worldview. He is among the few in Washington who do not
seem to have accepted the century-old principle that in order to defend its
interests, the United States <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/usa> must be
involved everywhere in the world, all the time.

Hagel is said to be "outside the mainstream" because he does not believe
American power can solve people's problems around the world. That is,
indeed, outside the mainstream. Everyone from Pentagon deadenders to Human
Rights Watch, for example, is trying to dissuade President Obama from his
commitment to remove all American troops from Afghanistan by 2014. Hagel
thinks it's a fine idea.

Another charge against Hagel is that he has described the defense budget as
"bloated"<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/20/defence-chuck-hagel-washington-post-war>.
That this can be considered controversial is a measure of how far from
reality Washington has slipped. It is like describing Washington's summer
climate as "warm" or Congress as "divided".

Hagel's biggest problem, though, is Iran.

He wants to see whether a deal between the United States and Iran is
possible. Such a deal is the nightmare scenario for Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu and those around him. They foolishly believe it would
endanger Israeli security. In fact, it would do the opposite: reduce the
threat from Iran by bringing it into the Middle East security system,
rather than pushing it ever further into isolation and anger.

Challenging orthodoxy is a death sentence in Washington. It may result in
the demise of Senator Hagel's prospects. But his willingness to challenge
dogma about Iran has deep roots in Nebraska.

Only one American has given his life for Iranian democracy. He was a young
idealist from Nebraska named Howard Baskerville. In 1907, fresh out of
Princeton, Baskerville went to Iran as a schoolteacher. He found himself in
the midst of a revolution against tyranny, and was carried away with
passion for the democratic cause.

Rejecting protests from the local American consul, he shaped a group of his
students into a military column. On 20 April 1909, he was
killed<http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/baskerville-howard-c>
while
leading them into battle.

Baskerville believed countries should be allowed to choose their own paths,
whether or not big powers agreed. So did another notable Nebraskan, Senator
George Norris, who voted against both United States entry into first world
war and American membership in the League of Nations.

Norris told Americans that the push toward global engagement was the
project of "munition manufacturers, stockbrokers, and bond dealers"; and he
warned that it "brings no prosperity to the great mass of common and
patriotic citizens".

Hagel is in the great American tradition of the prairie populist. He has
sought to speak a word or two of truth to power. Power is not amused. That
is why his nomination is in trouble before it has even been announced.


-- 
Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20121231/dc77917b/attachment.html>