The signatories include Senators Ensign, Brownback, Bond, Kyl, and Inhofe, though interestingly no Republican from the Foreign Relations Committee. The complaints echo those made by Senators Graham and McCain last week, mainly that Christopher Hill, nominee for the post of US Ambassador to Iraq, has no experience in the Middle East and no experience in civil-military relations of the kind that define the diplomatic work necessary in Iraq. "We do not believe that now is the time to appoint an ambassador who may need the equivalent of a crash course in Iraqi affairs," the senators write.
The Senators also say the found Hill's work in the Six Party talks "deeply troubling." The charge Hill with engaging in "evasive and unprofessional activities, including sideling key officials at the State Department and breaking commitments made for the record before congressional committees." This will be the crux of the opposition to Hill, though obviously it is the overall course of the North Korea talks that drive suspicion of his appointment.
Specifically, the senators cite Hill's testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee in 2008, during which Hill told Senator Brownback "I would be happy to invite [North Korea special envoy Jay Lefkowitz] to all future negotiating sessions with North Korea." That did not happen. The senators also cite comments Hill made to the effect that it would not be possible to reach an agreement with the North Koreans while they were still proliferating. "Yet only moths after making these statements, Ambassador Hill succeeded in reaching such an agreement before Congress had a chance to answer key questions about North Korea's alleged nuclear proliferation to Syria, taking place during Mr. Hill's own negotiations," the senators protest.
Finally, Hill's statements to New York Times reporter David Sanger for his new book, in which the senators say Hill refers to his superiors in the administration "in dismissive and derogatory terms," amount to "conduct wholly unbecoming a sitting U.S. official." We noted some of those statements on the blog here.
The letter, which can be read in its entirety here, states that the United States requires an ambassador to Iraq who "will deal with the American people, our President and Congress with frankness, honesty and professionalism. Ambassador Hill, we are afraid, has proven otherwise." And with that they ask Obama to withdraw the nomination.
Hill's confirmation hearings are scheduled for Wednesday next week. It's not clear whether Democrats will be able to muster the 60 votes necessary to break a Republican filibuster by Senator Brownback, who is said to have taken Hill's lack of honesty in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee quite personally.
