A5
OPINION
Thursday, February 7, 2012 | The Cavalier Daily
Hagel’s dialectic
A
Chuck Hagel’s willingness to break from conventional, partisan positions makes him a good choice for secretary of defense
S P R E S I D E N T Pentagon of spending too much B a r a c k O b a m a h a s money, claimed the Israel lobby begun his second term, he intimidates lawmakers and has has been working toward not contradicted statements reforming his cabinet after sev- that Israel has committed war eral first-term crimes and that FORREST BROWN members have the United States stepped down. OPINION COLUMNIST has been a “bully.” Some candidates Although none of he’s tapped, such as John Kerry these positions are popular, for secretary of state, have had many run counter to decades of relatively smooth confirmation GOP foreign policy. All of them, proceedings. Others have not. however, speak to the fact that Notable among the latter group Hagel is unafraid to voice his is Chuck Hagel, a former Repub- honest opinion without politics lican senator from Nebraska and party loyalty clouding his who has been nominated for judgement. secretary of defense. Though at It is easy to disagree with Hagel first glance Hagel would seem but impossible to doubt that like a good pick for both parties, he has been unafraid to speak he has faced significant criticism his mind and develop complex from the right throughout his approaches to policy issues most confirmation. Republicans point to controversial positions he has lawmakers approach in cookieheld in the past on Iran, Iraq, cutter fashion. This type of honIsrael, nuclear disarmament and esty makes him a great candimore as proof Hagel is a poor date for secretary of defense, choice for the job. He did not help a position that demands flexhimself by appearing lifeless in ibility when confronting new his confirmation hearing. Nev- situations. If Hagel is willing to ertheless, Hagel is the best pick speak his mind and differ from Obama has made so far for his his own party, he will certainly not be afraid to disagree with new cabinet. Hagel has received a lot of the president when important criticism for controversial inter- foreign policy decisions need to views and statements in his be made. The presence of dispast. He has opposed unilateral senting opinions in the Situation sanctions against Iran and the Room will help keep de facto troop surge in Iraq, accused the party positions on both sides
Hagel is willing to face the fact from dominating policy and will help maintain accountability in that the Pentagon’s budget is far too large, despite that any the Department of Defense. And though Hagel’s positions cuts in defense spending can be may be unpopular, that does political suicide for a GOP lawmaker. Defense not make them accounts for invalid. He “It is easy to disagree about 25 peroften raises with Hagel but impossible cent of federal important points that most to doubt that he has been spending, and Hagel recoglawmakers are unafraid to speak his modern afraid to conmind and develop com- nizes military stratfront because o f p o l i t i c a l plex approaches to policy egies do not pressure. He issues most lawmakers require such mense opposed the approach in cookie-cutter aa nm oi m unt of surge in Iraq, fashion.” money. which was Hagel has widely considmoved away ered to be successful, mostly because he recog- from his critical statements nized that Iraq was a costly, ill- about the Israel lobby and an advised and unnecessary war. interview where he appeared He opposes unilateral sanctions sympathetic to the idea that against Iran because he believes America misuses its power and diplomacy is the best solution. Israel is guilty of war crimes. His statements on Iran are often But all those moments show is questionable; for example, he that Hagel is willing to listen refused to define the Revolution- respectfully to opposing ideas ary Guard as a terrorist organi- and respond thoughtfully rather zation. Iran’s eagerness for his than bombastically like most confirmation is certainly not a politicians. His willingness to positive sign. But maybe having attack the Israel lobby also a secretary of defense with a his- proves he is not attached to past tory of open-mindedness when it policy but rather is willing to comes to Iran is what the execu- question the status quo. The U.S. tive needs to make substantial has given Israel a carte blanche for decades. Though support progress in diplomatic talks.
for Israel is crucial, it cannot be blind, which Hagel recognizes. All of the aforementioned positions are provocative and politically charged, but all of them are legitimate. Hagel will make sure these positions are heard and that politics does not prevent officials from discussing valid policy options. Hagel is certainly not the ideal candidate to take through a confirmation process. He has often appeared unqualified when facing tough questions from GOP lawmakers and has struggled to articulate strong defenses for many of his controversial opinions. His unwillingness to play politics ensures he will suffer in the press, and his attempts at answering questions with nuance and willingness to acknowledge past mistakes can make him appear weak. But these same traits make him an ideal candidate for a cabinet position. A brutally honest, nonpolitical secretary of defense who is willing to take stands on important issues would be a great asset to the United States. Forrest Brown’s columns appear Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at f.brown@ cavalierdaily.com.
Keeping the faith
L
Colleges should not chastise religious organizations for practicing faith-based discrimination
AST WEEK, the Univer cies are designed to promote a sity of Michigan de-recog meritocracy by eliminating fac nized the Asian chapter of tors that should not influence a InterVarsity Christian Fellowship person’s success. They embody because the group’s constitution what we all believe on a funrequired leaders to damental level: RUSSELL BOGUE sign a statement of inconsequential faith, a violation OPINION COLUMNIST attributes outside of the university’s your control — non-discrimination policy. such as skin color — should And this is not the first time not inhibit or advance you, InterVarsity — a national orga- compared to your peers. Your nization — has faced trouble on dedication, talents and achievecollege campuses. At Vanderbilt ments should be the benchmark last year, InterVarsity was tar- of your success. Seen in this geted along with other Christian light, non-discrimination poligroups because of faith-based cies are necessary and welcome qualifications for leadership. in any organization. Parading under the banner of But the issue becomes much inclusivity and non-discriminatrickier when religion comes tion, these institutions of higher into play. Unlike skin color, education have been forcing nationality or — many would religious organizations either to compromise their beliefs or leave argue — sexual orientation, the university, and in some cases what you believe is very much they have even compared faith- a conscious choice. Which God based qualifications for leader- you believe in, or whether you ship to racial discrimination. believe in God at all, is more Though the notable incidents accurately compared to your thus far are limited to merely political beliefs or personal two universities, the trend of opinions than to your skin color. harassing religious organizations Therefore, making distinctions is national and must stop before between students based on relimore college campuses experi- gious belief is inherently difference this persecution. The Uni- ent from differentiating based versity of Michigan and Vander- on race or orientation. One is bilt need to make an exception to reasonable and indeed necestheir non-discrimination policy sary for any selective organization; the other is unconstitutionfor religious organizations. To fully understand the issue, ally prejudicial. Even more important is the it is necessary to examine the purpose of non-discrimination historically significant role relirequirements. In the broadest gious organizations have had sense, non-discrimination poli- in the United States. Unlike
secular businesses or civic insti- plied. Religious organizations tutions, religious groups have must have the right to require always been given significant potential leaders to actually constitutional leeway in how share their faith. It strains they operate. The Founders rec- reason to hold that refusing a ognized that faith was a funda- Muslim or atheist a leadership position on mental part of a person’s life, “By undertaking the falsely InterVarsity Fela delicate and ennobling mission of apply- Christian lowship is intensely pering non-discrimination discriminasonal undertaking that in policies into any arena that t o r y i n t h e least. Should many ways requires making distincthe teacher’s defines what tions between students union accept it means to be a human. based on what they believe, a s t o c k b r o Should Religious orgaVanderbilt and the Univer- ker? the Amerinizations are tasked with no sity of Michigan are creat- can Academy less than the ing an environment hostile of Pediatrics forced to care of their to religious expression...” be accept engifollowers’ neers? It is in souls — a far fact far more higher calling than the ephemeral laws reasonable to hold that the and bureaucracies that govern only qualification necessary for our country. To many, ultimate leadership in a religious orgaauthority lies not in secular law nization is to actually believe but in sacred text, and govern- in what the organization stands mental intrusions on their right for. By undertaking the falsely to practice religion freely are affronts to their core beliefs. The ennobling mission of applying recent concession by the Obama non-discrimination policies into administration to exempt reli- any arena that requires making gious institutions from the man- distinctions between students date to pay for employees’ birth based on what they believe, control is an example of how Vanderbilt and the University lightly the government must of Michigan are creating envitread when it comes to the ronments hostile to religious expression and counter to the beliefs of its citizens. In this light, the non-discrimi- nation’s ideals. The ability to nation policies of these univer- regulate and select its leadersities have been grossly misap- ship is a vital function of any
C M Y K
Cyan Magenta Yellow Black
organization, but especially religious ones. Hamstringing religious groups in their efforts to choose genuinely faithful leaders is simply one step too far. Such policies are doomed to failure. Time and again, religion has survived secular attempts to influence its practice or limit its policies. Secular administrations come and go, nations flourish and collapse, but the human qualities of faith and belief have and will survive all attempts at outside influence. In practice, so-called non-discrimination policies have little effect when applied to religious organizations, as non-Christians aren’t exactly clamoring to lead Christian fellowship groups. In principle, however, these policies represent insensitivity to religious belief and an insult to the freedom of association. By shutting Christian groups off campus, these universities are in fact tarnishing the very ideal of diversity they seek to uphold. Vanderbilt, University of Michigan — you are helping no one. It’s time to give up on idolizing bland, unqualified “acceptance” and instead recognize the right of faith-based groups to require actual faith from their leaders. You’re fighting a losing battle. Russell Bogue’s column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at r.bogue@ cavalierdaily.com.