New choice for US UN Ambassador

[winoman]

(of course we can predict who is just going to love this guy...)

Bolton Tapped to Be Next U.N. Ambassador

By LIZ SIDOTI
The Associated Press
Tuesday, March 8, 2005;


WASHINGTON - President Bush's choice as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, the outspoken John R. Bolton, likely will face a tough Senate confirmation hearing before Democrats who argue that he has disdained the world body and Republicans who are wary of him.

Now undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, Bolton was named Monday for the U.N. post.

Almost immediately, Democrats objected that Bush had chosen a vocal United Nations critic although they see a pressing need to repair international relations. Bolton has criticized the U.N.'s bureaucracy and some of its peacekeeping operations, among other objections he has raised over a decade.

Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, senior Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, said he was surprised at the selection and that Bolton's "stated attitude toward the United Nations gives me great pause."

The Republican chairman of the committee, Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, told reporters: "I'm going to reserve any comments about the appropriateness or not of the president's choice."

Confirmation hearings are expected next month.

The appointment comes at a crucial time: U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan is going forward with plans to reform the world body, and U.S. opinion of the United Nations, particularly in Congress, is at a low.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, anticipating a possible fight over confirmation, said that "through our history some of our best ambassadors have been those with strong voices." She singled out former U.N. ambassadors Jeanne Kirkpatrick and Daniel Patrick Moynihan.

In 2001, 43 Democratic senators opposed Bolton's nomination for his current post. He was confirmed anyway.

During his tenure, Bolton has rankled lawmakers with his tough foreign policy talk. However, on Monday, he promised to work closely with Congress to advance Bush's policies. "Working closely with others is essential to ensure a safer world," he added.

If confirmed, Bolton, 56, would succeed former Sen. John Danforth, who retired in January.

At the United Nations, diplomats were optimistic.

"I hope that once he is here he will have a deeper perception of what the U.N. is about," Chinese Ambassador Wang Guangya said.

Algerian ambassador Abdallah Baali said, "I think when he joins the United Nations he will certainly adapt his views to the United Nations, and I am sure we will work together in a very constructive way."

Asked about Bolton's past criticisms of the organization, Argentinian ambassador Cesar Mayoral replied: "People change."

In Washington, Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee assailed Bolton.

Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut said Bolton's "antipathy to the U.N. will prevent him from effectively discharging his duties as our ambassador." And Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts said: "Quite simply, Mr. Bolton's nomination carries with it baggage we cannot afford."

Republican Sen. George Allen of Virginia praised Bolton as "just the kind of man we need to represent the United States at the United Nations" because he will scrutinize its actions and expenditures.

Other Republicans on the committee were far more reserved.

Sen. Lincoln Chafee, R-R.I., said in a statement: "I have been assured that he will bring a more balanced approach to his new role." Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., told reporters that he wanted to see whether Bolton has the skills to deal with an institution riddled with scandals. "It needs reform. It needs reform badly, and to just go up there and kick the United Nations around doesn't get the job done," Hagel said.

Known for a hard-edged approach, Bolton's previous comments about troublesome foreign issues and regimes have been far from diplomatic.

In a strongly worded speech in Tokyo last month, Bolton lashed out at China for not stopping its munitions companies from selling missile technology to Iran and other nations the United States considers rogue states.

Two years ago, Bolton denounced North Korean leader Kim Jong Il as a "tyrannical dictator" and described life under the ruler as "a hellish nightmare."

Furious, a North Korean spokesman fired back that "such human scum and bloodsucker" would be closed out of negotiations over the country's nuclear weapons program.

[winoman]

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/biog/2976.htm

[winoman]

Some qoutes by Bolton and others and such

Senator Jesse Helms: "John Bolton is the kind of man with whom I would want to stand at Armageddon, if it should be my lot to be on hand for what is forecast to be the final battle between good and evil in this world."


John Bolton: "It is a big mistake for us to grant any validity to international law even when it may seem in our short-term interest to do so—because, over the long term, the goal of those who think that international law really means anything are those who want to constrain the United States."

John Bolton:"There's no such thing as the United Nations," saying that ''If the U.N. secretary building in New York lost 10 stories, it wouldn't make a bit of difference.''

John Bolton:"Moreover, many Republicans in Congress - and perhaps a majority - not only do not care about losing the General Assembly vote but actually see it as a "make my day" outcome. Indeed, once the vote is lost, and the adverse consequences predicted by the U.N.'s supporters begin to occur, this will simply provide further evidence to many why nothing more should be paid to the U.N. system."

John Bolton:"...diplomatic recognition of Taiwan would be just the kind of demonstration of U.S. leadership that the region needs and that many of its people hope for. The notion that China would actually respond with force is a fantasy."

John Bolton:"We do not support measures that would constrain legal trade and legal manufacturing of small arms and light weapons,"

John Boton:...after the U.S. has sorted Iraq "it will be necessary to deal with threats from Syria, Iran, and North Korea afterwards."

Ian Williams : "John Bolton is one of the major reasons why few other countries trust the motives, or indeed the rationality of the U.S. administration"

[winoman]

LOL - funny in hindsight...

Condi's First Victory
She doesn't pick John Bolton as her deputy.
By Fred Kaplan
Posted Friday, Jan. 7, 2005

A few weeks remain before her confirmation hearings as secretary of state, but Condoleezza Rice has already won a crucial battle. The victory came Thursday afternoon, with the news that she will appoint Robert Zoellick, currently the U.S. trade representative, as her deputy. President Bush confirmed the reports with an announcement this morning.

The major papers exiled the story deep inside the news pages—just another piece about second-term personnel shifts. Rice and those around her know it's much, much more. Last November, when President Bush picked her to be the new top diplomat, I wrote that her first test would be whether she'd get to name her own No. 2—or whether she'd be forced to take John Bolton, the neocons' favorite candidate for the job.

During Bush's first term, Bolton was undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, but his main function was to serve as Vice President xxxx Cheney's agent in Foggy Bottom. In the internecine disputes that erupted among the State Department, the Pentagon, and Cheney's White House staff—fights over whether to go to war in Iraq, to negotiate about nukes with Iran and North Korea, or to ignore a variety of international agreements—Bolton was to monitor, oppose, and if possible thwart from within the moderating influences of Colin Powell and his pin-striped multilateralists.

After it became clear that neither Powell nor his like-minded deputy, Richard Armitage, would be staying for a second term, Cheney and the circle of neoconservatives around Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld lobbied for Bolton to be moved up to the No. 2 slot—to solidify their grip not just on the State Department, but on foreign policy broadly. The issue for Rice was not whether she agreed with Bolton's views, but whether she would be allowed to run her department. To be an independent secretary, Rice would need a deputy who clearly worked for her. She would never have been sure whether Bolton was plotting behind her back.

That she has named Zoellick as her deputy indicates—to the professional diplomatic corps, to the neocons, and to tea-leaf readers in foreign ministries around the world—that Rice will run her shop. More important, Bush's official confirmation of the appointment signals that he is letting her run her shop and that, at least on this important procedural battle, he's siding with Rice, not with Cheney.

By some reports, not only did Bolton lose the campaign for deputy secretary, he'll be leaving the State Department—and possibly the administration—altogether.

Zoellick does not represent some departure from the mainsprings of Bush's foreign policy. In the late 1990s, he was a member of the Project for a New American Century, the neocon think tank that pushed for a more aggressive stance toward toppling "rogue regimes." (Bolton was this organization's president and several of Bush's top officials—including Rumsfeld and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz—were active members.) However, Zoellick is also widely known, and respected, as a professional diplomat and negotiator, not a bomb-hurling ideologue. He was an undersecretary in James Baker's State Department during George H.W. Bush's presidency. As U.S. trade representative these past four years, he negotiated with China over admission to the World Trade Organization and with various governments in Latin America over issues relating to NAFTA. He has had a good relationship with Rice since they worked together on W.'s foreign-policy transition team in 2000.

On another level, Zoellick's appointment might also reflect an awareness—only dimly and erratically present during Bush's first term—that economic policy is an important element of foreign policy.

Earlier reports placed Zoellick in line to be the next president of the World Bank, a more prestigious post than deputy at State. But professional diplomats tend to go where their president wants them to go. (Meanwhile, rumors are swirling that the World Bank job might be awarded to Colin Powell. The notion makes sense on two levels. First, Robert McNamara pioneered the idea that a departing, war-weary Cabinet secretary could take refuge there. Second, the assignment would keep Powell from writing the tell-all memoir for which publishers are no doubt lining up to offer him huge advances.)

In any event, this was but Rice's first fight; it won't be her last. She at least has a patch of ground to stand on for future battles over policy. Still, Cheney and Rumsfeld are experienced and savage gladiators in the realm of bureaucratic warfare. As national security adviser in Bush's first term, Rice demonstrated little such prowess and found herself outmaneuvered by them at nearly every turn. Zoellick's appointment suggests she'll be running Foggy Bottom, and that's no small triumph. But who will run foreign policy?

[winoman]

Mcain sees it differently

One has to wonder what is most important - misconduct of Peacekeeprs in the Congo - or perceptions concerning the US as essentially telling the world to F off...and of course the resulting ability fro the US to effectively conduct itself internationally...

McCain: Bolton the Right Man for Corrupt U.N.

Sen. John McCain praised Under Secretary of State John Bolton Tuesday morning, saying the Bush administration's controversial nominee to be United Nations ambassador is just the right man to clean house at the corrupt world body.

"I think John Bolton might be just what the U.N. needs," said McCain, who often sides with Democrats on controversial issues, in comments to "Imus in the Morning" co-host Charles McCord.

McCain then ticked off a list of scandals that have engulfed the world body, noting, "We've got the Oil-for-Food scandal, we've got misconduct in the Congo by the peacekeepers, we've got a whole lot of problems within the United Nations."
The Arizona Republican said Bolton was "a tough guy - I think he'll do a good job."

"I think that all of us agree that the United Nations needs reforming, and I hope that he'll work in that direction," he added.

McCain's praise stood in sharp contrast with the comments of his good friend and colleague, Sen. John Kerry, who blasted the selection on Monday, saying, "Quite simply, Mr. Bolton's nomination carries with it baggage we cannot afford."

Sen. Joe Biden said the Bush U.N. pick gave him "great pause," while Sen. Chris Dodd complained that Bolton's "antipathy to the U.N. will prevent him from effectively discharging his duties as our ambassador."

But McCain said Bolton's nomination "reminds me a little bit of Ronald Reagan appointing one of my heroes, Jeanne Kirkpatrick, as ambassador to the United Nations back in the 1980s."

Noting that her nomination was roundly criticized at the time, he reminded: "She turned out to be one of the absolute finest ambassadors that we've ever had."

[Inna]

Senator Jesse Helms: "John Bolton is the kind of man with whom I would want to stand at Armageddon, if it should be my lot to be on hand for what is forecast to be the final battle between good and evil in this world."

are you kidding me?? Jesse Helms supports Bolton?? Helms doesnt even support the UN ...what has the world come to

[nunechka]

bolton is famous for running into the ballot counting rooms in florida and saying "I'm with the Bush-Cheney team, and I'm here to stop the count,"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1434284,00.html

[winoman]

are you kidding me?? Jesse Helms supports Bolton?? Helms doesnt even support the UN ...what has the world come to

Exactly the point...

And Nunechka - great article (from the GUardian)...I particualrly liked this statement:

"Bolton is a specimen of the "primitives", as Truman's secretary of state Dean Acheson called the unilateralists and McCarthyites of the early cold war. Through his political integration into the neocon apparatus, Bolton might be properly classified a neoprimitive."

Yes - a neo-primitive...I think we have a new description of some of our more primitive neo-con thinking friends here...

And this bit is very telling (and unfortunatly typical of the attitude of the current administration):

"In late November, Bolton denounced the Blair government and the Europeans negotiating with the Iranians as "soft" for attempting "diplomatic means".

and most of all this is a very worrisome trend:

"a true believer who imagines Fortress America besieged by the UN and Europeans - "Americanists find themselves surrounded by small armies of globalists, each tightly clutching a favourite new treaty or multilateralist proposal". But Bolton's coarse ideology is advanced by sophisticated campaigns of disinformation - and not only on Iraq and North Korea. His leaks of falsehoods that Syria and Cuba had developed weapons of mass destruction sparked internal revolts by intelligence professionals and the foreign service."

[nunechka]

i am telling you people... if everyone in the world became like the US, we would not be living anymore... war would be declared on a daily basis...

remember the war on crime, the war on drugs, the war on gang violence, the war on poverty, the war on communism, the war on socialism, the war on terrorism, etc... there is a war for everything for these people...

[ArmoBarbi]

bolton is famous for running into the ballot counting rooms in florida and saying "I'm with the Bush-Cheney team, and I'm here to stop the count,"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/...434284,00.html