Choice of Pompeo sends wrong signal

For the most part, this newspaper advocates for a president’s nominees (or a governor’s) to be confirmed. The executive, after all, is the choice of the people and as such, has constitutional appointment authority. Only in rare cases where a nominee is unqualified or holds questionable views do we advocate voting against.

With President Donald Trump, the rare cases have been taking place more frequently. Too many of his nominees are neither qualified nor particularly suited for the high positions to which the president has appointed them. He has chosen people, too, who appear more interested in self-enrichment than in serving the public. His Cabinet has experienced turnover, scandals and incompetence, with no end in sight. And, yes, several appointees do have views so outside the mainstream as to disqualify them from service.

Now, the president has asked the Senate to confirm current CIA Director Mike Pompeo as secretary of state, replacing Rex Tillerson, who did not seem to get along with his boss and ended up being fired via Twitter. Pompeo, despite his experience and credentials, nearly did not make it out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee alive — only when the ever-flexible GOP Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky decided to vote yes (despite initially announcing opposition) was the way clear for Pompeo’s nomination to make it to the full Senate. It likely will be approved by a majority of senators this week. Republicans have a majority, after all, and several red-state Senate Democrats have said they will support Pompeo.

That’s unfortunate. While Pompeo’s experience — first in his class at West Point, Harvard Law, a stint in Congress and service at the CIA — is exemplary, his positions on Muslims and the Middle East are unacceptable for the person charged with leading America’s diplomatic efforts around the world. His style of foreign policy is more interventionist and less focused on diplomatic solutions. He, like Trump, does not support the Iran deal on nuclear nonproliferation but will be the lead negotiator when working with North Korea to avoid future conflicts.

New Mexico U.S. Sen. Tom Udall, who voted against Pompeo in the Foreign Relations Committee, told NPR earlier this month that “Mike Pompeo isn’t the right person to be the United States’ top diplomat. He’s shown that he’ll double down on President Trump’s worst instincts and policies. I’m very concerned that he’d be a yes-man for President Trump.”

That matters, Udall went on to say, because the secretary of state needs to push back against a president’s worst instincts (and in Trump’s case, there are plenty of those). Udall, again: “President Trump’s dangerous and erratic tweets and statements threaten to bring us closer to war. The next secretary of state needs to be an independent and strong advocate for diplomacy. I don’t think Mike Pompeo will be that voice.”

Udall will have the opportunity to vote no once again when Pompeo’s nomination reaches the floor. U.S. Sen. Martin Heinrich also has said he will vote no. Both New Mexico senators also opposed Pompeo as CIA director, positions that are less about pleasing progressive Democrats and more about what is right for the integrity of the United States.

Despite what critics say, opposition to Pompeo’s nomination is not about partisanship — it is about ensuring the secretary of state has the temperament and mindset to practice diplomacy, not to make a chaotic world more dangerous. Pompeo likely will win approval this week, and we wish him well as secretary of state if confirmed.

Should he tone down anti-Islamic rhetoric, focus on diplomacy and use his close relationship to Trump to calm the president down, we will be happy to have been wrong.