Q&A: CHUCK HAGEL
Transcript: Chuck Hagel On The Presidential Election And Why He Is Leaving Electoral Politics

© National Journal Group Inc.
Friday, April 11, 2008

National Journal On Air with Linda Douglass
Chuch Hagel

National Journal's Linda Douglass sat down with Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., for the April 11 edition of "National Journal On Air." This is a transcript of their conversation. Audio of the full show is also available.


Q: We are here live at the Newseum, and we have the great pleasure of Senator Chuck Hagel, Republican of Nebraska, joining us here. Welcome, Senator Hagel.
Hagel: Linda, thank you -- a high honor not only to be with you, but with this magnificent new news museum. I'm just delighted to be here. Thank you.
Q: Well, it has been very exciting to watch. We have many, many tourists standing around watching our interview now, but we'll pretend that we're just, you know, in a private place -- like on the radio.
Hagel: Just you and me.
Q: So, let me start by asking you -- you've written a book called "America: Our Next Chapter." First, let me remind our listeners here -- Senator Hagel is considered a maverick Republican. Many of us thought that you were going to run for president, and instead you've decided to leave elective politics altogether. This is your last term. So in the book that you've written, what is it that you're really trying to say as you depart politics?
Hagel: One, that the challenges that face our country and the world today are all integrated. They are woven into one fabric. And we can't talk about one great challenge facing our country and the world without understanding all the rest and where they fit.

I wanted to also talk a little bit about how we are living through one of these great transformational times in the history of man, how everything is changing centers of gravity. And that is going to require political leadership that brings our country together -- a consensus to govern. And if we fail to do that, then we will not be able to deal with the great challenges ahead, and at a time in the world of such great immediacy, where there is little margin of error, we cannot afford to squander another four years. The world will be leaderless, our country will be leaderless. We are in some trouble now.

I don't think there's anything we can't get out of if we bring our country together, and I wanted to bring that all together in a cogent, lucid way and make that statement and also, at the same time, deal with the reality of these challenges, but also the reality of the fact that we can get out of this. We do have answers. We are, I still believe, the finest country with the best people in the world. Our assets far exceed our deficits. We now just have to be wise, pull our country together, and lead the world.

Q: Well, let's talk about leading the world, and the next president who will lead this country and be a leader in the world. You have a long and famous friendship with John McCain -- your fellow Republican, fellow Vietnam veteran. Yet you have not endorsed John McCain for president, and you've certainly split with him over the Iraq war -- he is very much for it and you are outspoken against it. Is that why you haven't endorsed John McCain, and will you not, because of that, endorse John McCain?
Hagel: Well, as you noted, Linda, he and I are very close friends. I know in this town everyone is a friend, but John and I are very close friends, and I have a strong feeling for him, and there is no one I admire more. But as you noted, we have a very significant difference, not just on Iraq and where we are, but probably more importantly, how do we unwind our involvement? Because we are going to unwind our involvement -- it has to be done responsibly, honorably. And I want to understand, more than I do now, how John intends to do that. He is going to have to present that to the American people, as will the Democratic candidate for president.

I think that issue alone is so important that until the American people have some confidence in the president, whoever we elect in November, to get that done, it will hold hostage our ability to solve every other problem in this country, if for no other reason than that the country is so divided over this issue. The next president will not be able to govern and really address these next issues, all of those issues, until this issue is resolved. I think it's that critical, and I want to know more about where John wants to go and how he wants to get there.

Q: But the one thing you know is that he doesn't want to pull the troops out quickly, and he doesn't feel any urgency to end the war -- so doesn't that make it unlikely to impossible that you would endorse him?
Hagel: Well, the gap may be so great and so wide and deep that I will not endorse John, and it may well be I will endorse no one. I'll just finish my term and try to make as many contributions as I can to a better world, and help where I can.
Q: Well, let's go over some of the things, though, that you've been saying about at least one of the other candidates, and that's Barack Obama. You have talked extensively about how important it is to have fundamental change in this election, how important it is to have a younger president because so much of the world's population now is young, how exciting it would be to have an African-American president and what great talent Barack Obama has -- I'm just bringing back to you some of the things you've said. You sound like you're really considering supporting him.
Hagel: Well, I haven't said it exactly the way you've framed it, but what I have said is that if this country is to work our way out of a deep hole I believe we are in, domestically and internationally -- and I believe we're capable of doing that -- it's going to require a president with a 21st-century frame of reference -- understanding that the issues now are going to have to be defined and dealt with within 21st-century thinking.

One of the things I've said about Obama -- I don't think it is exclusive just to Obama -- is that because he is young and because he is smart -- and all three candidates are smart, they are all qualified -- that it may well be that he is in a better position to deal with that. But it's also going to require two things that every successful person requires, certainly every successful president: One is judgment -- solid, good judgment -- and the right people being around him.

Q: Do you think he has that, from what you've seen?
Hagel: I think he does, but again, no one will know that until the individual is in the White House and has to deal with these issues for four years. And again, I can't overemphasize, in my opinion, how important it is to have the right people around you. These issues are so big, so complicated and so deep that no one individual is that good and that smart. You need a lot of smart people. I think it's going to require a bipartisan cabinet -- reaching out to both parties and reaching out to the Congress to find a consensus to govern. If that next president doesn't do that, or is not capable, or won't do it, then the next president will fail and fail our country.
Q: You could see yourself serving in a Obama or Clinton administration if they were to ask you in the right position?
Hagel: Well, I don't anticipate I'm going to be in any government position next year or for the foreseeable future. But certainly, any American who cares about his country, if he's asked by the president of the United States to consider taking on an important, responsive job, sure, you'd have to consider it.
Q: One of the things you said when you were being interviewed by Charlie Rose was that McCain would be the oldest person ever to enter the White House. Is that an issue?
Hagel: Well, I think that's up to the American people to make that decision. John McCain is high-energy -- big motor under that engine, as you know. He's smart. He's agile. He's experienced. He has a lot of fun. But my point in making that comment to Charlie Rose was the dramatic choice that the country may well have. We may well see one of the youngest and most inexperienced candidates for president versus the oldest and one of the most experienced candidates for president. Now, I'm not one who is capable of determining whether that is good or bad or is one better than the other -- the American people will sort that out. But that was my point in bringing that out -- is the dramatic difference -- and if it happens to be those two, then the difference of philosophy or policy, or if it's Clinton, certainly her policies are different.
Q: It did surprise people that you -- rather than running for president, which we thought you might do -- you just decided to leave electoral politics. Why was that?
Hagel: Well, one, I had said before I was elected 12 years ago that I thought two terms was enough. I didn't sign a pledge. I didn't say that I was going to only serve 12 years, but I did say the day after I was elected 12 years ago that I thought it was enough -- it is for me. I want to go do some other things -- hopefully, maybe will have an opportunity to help influence the direction of the country some other way. Twelve years for me is enough in the Senate. It's been the greatest privilege of my life. I'm not bitter. I'm not despondent. I'm not upset. I'm looking forward to the freedom, actually.
Q: Very unusual decision to make to leave that position of power. We really appreciate your stopping by, Senator Hagel. Always great to talk to you, always an important voice in the political discussion, and I hope you'll come back and join us again.
Hagel: I will, Linda. Thank you very much.