Explore Candidates and Issues
Christopher Dodd on Iraq and Foreign Policy
This candidate has withdrawn from the election
Everyone who has looked at this issue has drawn the conclusion that there is no military solution to it. Given the fact that we are less safe, less secure, more vulnerable, weaker today, not stronger, as a result of this policy, we ought to try to bring it to a close. The right thing to do was to pursue this issue of having a date certain.
2007 Dem. debate at Saint Anselm College Jun 3, 2007
Q: Should the US set a firm deadline for the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq? DODD: I believe we should. I didn't come to that decision a long time ago. It's been an evolving situation here. I think most would agree today that we're more isolated today, our moral standing in the world has suffered terribly over the last number of years as a result of our involvement in Iraq.
Meet the Press: Meet the Candidates 2008 series May 20, 200
Q: You've cosponsored something called Feingold-Reid, which would, in effect, cut off the funding spigot by about a year from now, and draw the troops out. Is that possible, the notion of no more troops in Iraq? DODD: ...I'm proud to support the Feingold-Reid legislation, which does exactly as you've described it. It would impart an end date at the end of next March. Also we need to engage in the robust diplomacy that we haven't been engaged in.
South Carolina 2007 Democratic primary debate, on MSNBC Apr 26, 2007
We need to have a finishing date. I believe that we ought to have an end-date of March of '08 to provide a year-long opportunity for redeployment.
Virtual Town Hall on Iraq, sponsored by MoveOn.org Apr 10, 2007
Voted YES on redeploying US troops out of Iraq by March 2008
US Policy in Iraq Resolution; Bill S.J.Res.9 ; vote number 2007-075 on Mar 15, 2007
Voted NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007
Kerry Amendment to National Defense Authorization Act; Bill S.Amdt. 4442 to S. 2766 ; vote number 2006-181 on Jun 22, 2006
What makes us think at this particular junction that 17,000 more people, young men and women, injecting them in a city that's being ripped apart by, by sectarian violence is going to sort that out? We need to move to a different strategy.
Meet the Press: Meet the Candidates 2008 series Jan 14, 2007
Dodd, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, opposed Bush's call in January 2007 to temporarily increase U.S. troops in Iraq to combat sectarian violence and help Iraqis achieve independence.
We don't need a surge of troops in Iraq--we need a surge of diplomacy and politics. Every knowledgeable person who has examined the Iraq situation for the past several years--Baker and Hamilton, senior military officials, junior officer--has drawn the same conclusion--there is no military solution in Iraq. To insist upon a surge is wrong.
Q: There's some concern about the bases we've built in Iraq, and whether the candidates are clear about whether we are turning those bases back over to the Iraqis or whether we would somehow retain possession of those? DODD: Well, my view is you don't need American bases in Iraq. We've got plenty of base capacity in the region.
Q: You said that Sen. Obama's "assertions about military affairs have been confused. You added, "He should not be making unwise categorical statements about military options." What in your opinion has been confused? DODD: Words mean things. We've got to be very careful about language that's used in terms of the harm it can do to our nation. When you raise issues about Pakistan, while General Musharraf is no Thomas Jefferson, he may be the only thing that stands between us and having an Islamic fundamentalist state in that country. The alternative could be a lot worse for our country. I think it's highly irresponsible to suggest we may be willing unilaterally to invade a nation who we're trying to get to be more cooperative with us in Afghanistan and elsewhere.
2007 AFL-CIO Democratic primary forum Aug 8, 2007
Q: Darfur is the second time that our nation has had a chance to do something about genocide in Africa. The first came in Rwanda in 1994, when we did nothing. DODD: We've unfortunately, as a result of our conflict in Iraq, have lost our moral authority. And as a result of that, our ability to mobilize the world on issues like Darfur has been severely damaged. But the United States should be able to take some unilateral action here in providing the kind of protection where people are being slaughtered in that country; and in the meantime, get our military out of Iraq, as I've planned and offered to do, and thus regain that stature, which we need to be doing as a nation in this world and be able to build those coalitions that will respond to an issue like Darfur. But in the meantime, the United States ought to act. Source: 2007 Democratic Primary Debate at Howard University Jun 28, 2007
2007 Democratic Primary Debate at Howard University Jun 28, 2007
Sen. Dodd (D-CT) differs from many of his fellow Democratic contenders in that he has said that the United States should not engage (AP) with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whom he once called a "thug." In a 2007 MoveOn.org Town Hall Meeting, Dodd said he would support military action against Iran without congressional approval "under extreme circumstances," though he thinks the president should seek that approval "after the emergency." In March 2007, Dodd cosponsored the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act, which would impose tighter multilateral sanctions on Iran in response to its nuclear activities. The act would expand the ban Iranian exports to the U.S. and further limits food exports from the U.S. to Iran. It also would freeze assets of Iranian officials. That bill would also support categorizing the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist group. It has not yet been voted on in Congress.
Sen. Dodd (D-CT) has taken a solidly pro-Israel stance throughout his political career, according to pro-Israel lobby groups. At a speech before AIPAC in October 2006, Dodd boasted that he has "supported substantial foreign aid for Israel" since he was first elected to the Senate in 1980. Dodd cosponsored the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006. He also cosponsored Clinton’s Senate resolution in April 2007 urging Hamas and Hezbollah to release captive Israeli soldiers. Dodd, a longtime member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, opposes the recognition of any Palestinian government including Hamas, which won the January 2006 Palestinian elections. Throughout his career he regularly has supported large financial and military aid packages for Israel. Dodd says as president he would send former president Bill Clinton to the region "on a permanent basis for a while" to help negotiate a peace agreement. (DesMoines Register) Dodd joined Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) in a controversial trip (BosGlobe) to Syria in December 2006.
Sen. Dodd (D-CT) has been critical of the Bush administration's policy toward Cuba and of the embargo more generally, which he says "has failed to bring about the changes in Cuba that all of us wish to see, such as freedom, and democracy, and prosperity." As such, Dodd is currently cosponsoring the Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act of 2007 (PDF), which would allow Americans to travel to Cuba. "The United States' most potent weapon against totalitarianism is the influence of ordinary American citizens," he says. In 2002, after ex-President Jimmy Carter called for an end to the embargo and said Castro should respect human rights, Dodd said Carter's approach to Cuba is "far more constructive" than that of President Bush. In 1996, Dodd voted against measures to place sanctions on the Castro government.
Voted NO on cap foreign aid at only $12.7 billion.
H.R. 2606 Conference Report; Bill H.R. 2606 ; vote number 1999-312 on Oct 6, 1999
Sen. Dodd (D-CT) supports UN reform. He has said that the United Nations "seems at times to be crumbling under the weight of its own imperfections. Since the end of the Cold War, it has become increasingly polarized and less effective." However, he says, the UN charter itself does not need to be changed. "The authors of the UN Charter were on the right track when they wrote that document," he says.
"So I would be very committed to the elimination of these weapons around the world... one way to build that kind of relationship around the world is by taking the lead on this. You would not do it unilaterally, but you would do it in the context of other nations as well."