Brownback promises battle on Iraq ambassador nominee

President Obama's nomination of Christopher Hill to be ambassador to Iraq has prompted fierce criticism from a handful of senior Republican senators in what is likely a prelude to a bruising battle on the Senate floor. Critics including Sen. Sam Brownback charge that Hill, a career diplomat, misled Congress in testimony last year when he was handling the six-party talks dealing with North Korean nuclear disarmament.

Brownback charges that Hill failed to follow through on his promise to confront North Korea on its human rights record. The Kansas Republican, joined by four other GOP senators -- Christopher (Kit) Bond of Missouri, John Ensign of Nevada, James Inhofe of Oklahoma and Whip Jon Kyl of Arizona -- recently urged the president to withdraw the nomination not only because of what they see as Hill's misleading testimony but also because of his inexperience in dealing with Iraq. Sen. John McCain of Arizona, last year's Republican presidential nominee, also opposes the nomination.

Obama and Senate Democratic leaders counter that as a seasoned diplomat, Hill is well-suited for this key post. Hill also has won a key endorsement from Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, the senior Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, who said that Hill had "demonstrated extraordinary diplomatic and managerial skills in dealing with an isolated and inscrutable North Korean regime." Lugar's panel is scheduled to hold a hearing on the nomination Wednesday.

Brownback adamantly disagrees with Lugar. Last year, the Kansan even held up President Bush's nominee to South Korea until Hill agreed to take steps to make North Korea's human rights record part of the negotiations. But the senator says that Hill went back on his word. In an interview with National Journal last week, Brownback discussed his determination to do everything he can to kill the nomination. Edited excerpts follow.

NJ: What do you intend to do when Christopher Hill's nomination to be ambassador to Iraq reaches the Senate floor?

Brownback: We are going to fight hard against Chris. I met with him [on March 18] in my office and he did not allay any of my concerns. When he was conducting six-party talks, I asked him to involve the special envoy for human rights. He didn't want to do it. So I held up an ambassadorial nominee to South Korea. The State Department really wanted that ambassadorial nominee.

Finally [former Virginia GOP Senator] John Warner brokered a deal in the Armed Services Committee where Chris Hill was testifying and Warner had me ask questions. One of them was, "Will you invite the special envoy for human rights to the six-party talks?" He said yes, he would. That didn't happen. On his word of doing that, in front of open committee, I lifted my hold on the South Korea ambassador. So he misled me.

NJ: So he lied?

Brownback: He did not do what he said he would do. It was very direct, it was very clear. And it did not happen.

NJ: Have you talked to Senator Lugar at all about him?

Brownback: I raised it at [Republican] caucus on [March 17]. He was there at caucus when I raised this concern.

NJ: What is your reaction to Senator Lugar's support for the nomination?

Brownback: Dick is a great guy. I respect him fully. We have had different outlooks on the six-party talks in Korea. He's been more supportive of moving forward without the human rights agenda even though that was the bill that passed. But I have nothing but high regard for Dick Lugar.

NJ: I know you have written a letter to the White House detailing your opposition. What is the extent of the opposition?

Brownback: I think we are gaining some steam in our caucus off of [his] complete misrepresentation to Congress. And then Hill [also] had some choice things to say about the president [Bush] he served under. It seems as if he went against both Congress and the president in his conducting of the six-party talks.

NJ: Have you ever done this before?

Brownback: I don't recall ever holding up an ambassadorial nominee outside of the South Korean ambassador.

NJ: So this is a big step for you?

Brownback: Yeah. If they nominate somebody qualified to an ambassadorial position, I don't have difficulties. I usually will try to meet with them [to discuss] countries I have been working on and talk with them. They normally have been very good to work with. But Chris has not been good to work with. He has misled me. He has not done what Congress directed. And even our then-ambassador to Japan said he was frozen out of the talks [on North Korea] and the Japanese had concerns. Their embassy contacted my office recently about how the six-party talks were conducted. So you have a guy who is a diplomat that is not operating like much of a diplomat.

NJ: Why do you think the president is so adamant that Hill is the right man for the job?

Brownback: I don't know. There are a lot of diplomats out there that I think would cherish this sort of opportunity. This is our biggest portfolio in the world today. I don't think it is a very smart move by the administration, but it is their choice.

Check out the blog Lost in Transition, a joint effort of Government Executive and National Journal.