The Corner

To Be or Not To Be Hagel

Four years ago, Barack Obama’s widely praised retention of Republican Bob Gates was done to reassure Washington of a bipartisan and competent continuity at Defense in difficult times. In contrast, the deliberately provocative nomination of Republican Chuck Hagel is meant to remind Washington that no longer will there be either bipartisanship or continuity, but rather a radically new direction at Defense.

Senator Hagel in his testimony at times seemed genuinely befuddled and sorely confused about his own past contradictory statements, his current incoherent beliefs, and the very policy of the administration he is to serve. In political terms, his performance did not meet the minimum level of competency to ensure that his supporters were not embarrassed by their own advocacy.

It was also hard to determine whether Hagel (in the manner of recent media appearances by Colin Powell) was just rusty from years out of office, or too accustomed to being on the giving rather than the receiving end of bullying questions, or for so long pampered as the “maverick” by favorable Beltway media that he became ill-prepared for genuine cross-examination — or if he was put in an unenviable position of insincerely retracting what recently he had so genuinely expressed.

Not since the failed 1989 defense-secretary nomination of John Tower — likewise a combat veteran and senator — have Senate supporters of a nominee had such an albatross hung around their necks. And yet, Democrats in the majority will no doubt win the nomination on the theory that rejection would do more damage to the Obama administration than confirmation would do harm to the country.

Then there is the old logic that a president should get the appointments he deserves, that someone who served in the Senate should, de facto, at least be qualified to be a cabinet secretary; that the deer-in-the-headlights confusion of Hagel should earn some pathos by reason of the sheer one-sidedness of the exchanges in the manner we so often come to empathize with the outmatched, and, of course, that he is a decorated combat veteran.

The result is that with Kerry, Brennan, and Hagel we have a much different national-security trinity from Clinton, Petraeus, and Panetta — though one far closer to the now unbound second-term visions of Barack Obama.

Victor Davis Hanson — NRO contributor Victor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and the author, most recently, of The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won.

Most Popular


The Gun-Control Debate Could Break America

Last night, the nation witnessed what looked a lot like an extended version of the famous “two minutes hate” from George Orwell’s novel 1984. During a CNN town hall on gun control, a furious crowd of Americans jeered at two conservatives, Marco Rubio and Dana Loesch, who stood in defense of the Second ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Obstruction Confusions

In his Lawfare critique of one of my several columns about the purported obstruction case against President Trump, Gabriel Schoenfeld loses me — as I suspect he will lose others — when he says of himself, “I do not think I am Trump-deranged.” Gabe graciously expresses fondness for me, and the feeling is ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Students’ Anti-Gun Views

Are children innocents or are they leaders? Are teenagers fully autonomous decision-makers, or are they lumps of mental clay, still being molded by unfolding brain development? The Left seems to have a particularly hard time deciding these days. Take, for example, the high-school students from Parkland, ... Read More
PC Culture

Kill Chic

We live in a society in which gratuitous violence is the trademark of video games, movies, and popular music. Kill this, shoot that in repugnant detail becomes a race to the visual and spoken bottom. We have gone from Sam Peckinpah’s realistic portrayal of violent death to a gory ritual of metal ripping ... Read More