For Hagel, Standing Up Brought a Fall From Favor

Berens offers a wide range of opinions and speculation on the subject from political scholars and operatives, but by the conclusion of the book, the questions of whether Hagel will run or could mount an effective campaign are left hanging.

Authors of speculative books on politics run the risk of being overtaken by events, and Berens's observations have a slightly dated feel. Her book leaves off in early 2005, with the Hamlet-like Hagel still pondering his future. But a lot has happened since then, and other Republicans, including McCain, Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts and Sen. George Allen of Virginia, are way ahead of Hagel in organization, fundraising and prominence in the polls.

For all the frustration Hagel expresses about the Republican Party, he is philosophically in tune with many of its traditional stances. He is an ardent free-trader, favors as little government as possible (wishful thinking in an era of exploding government growth) and supports limits to government intrusion in the private lives of Americans, while Bush has authorized warrantless wiretaps of telephones and e-mails.

Hagel, 59, still has bits of shrapnel in his chest and the remnants of burns to his face from his service as an infantryman in Vietnam in the late 1960s. Unlike his brother, Tom, who walked point with him in the same infantry unit, Hagel supported the war effort and never took part in protests. It took decades of study and reflection before he came around to his brother's conclusion that the war had been a huge mistake and that, as he described it, "there was just so much dishonesty in it."

Recently, Hagel called Iraq "an absolute replay of Vietnam."

The book suggests that Hagel's Vietnam experience helped to shape his internationalist perspective and to put him on a track to a political career. It also may have heavily influenced his views on the U.S. invasion of Iraq -- which he voted to authorize and later came to regret -- as well as his skepticism of the administration's motives and dismay with its performance. He has asserted that the White House has lost touch with reality and that the reconstruction effort in Iraq is "beyond pitiful."

In the fall of 2004, Harold W. Andersen, the retired publisher of the Omaha World-Herald, wrote a column for the paper declaring that Nebraska Republicans were tired of Hagel's criticism of Bush's handling of the war in Iraq. Hagel responded that it was his responsibility as a senator to ask the hard questions that "were not asked when we sent young men and women into Vietnam."

"Where were our elected officials then?" he asked, with the same straight-from-the-shoulder forthrightness that has gotten him into hot water with his party.

Pianin is the Post's congressional editor.