My Photo

Search Rubicon


Death in Iraq:
Day 1,998

Photos

  • www.flickr.com
    This is a Flickr badge showing public photos from Robert Silvey. Make your own badge here.

Details

Blog powered by TypePad
Member since 03/2004

« Way Out in Right Field | Main | Imperial Brotherhood »

Thursday, 07 April 2005

Bolton versus the UN

Bolton_10_spades_mugEver since George Bush stopped listening to Colin Powell—shortly after 9/11/2001—the international status of the United States has gradually worsened. The US is now more feared than loved, and the quarreling world is a more dangerous place than it was before Bush took office.

Recently Powell, by omission and by implication, offered Bush a piece of advice—but it's unlikely Bush has started listening to him again. Five former Republican secretaries of state sent a letter to the Senate, recommending approval of John Bolton as UN ambassador, but Powell's name was not included. The five were James Baker, Lawrence Eagleburger, Alexander Haig, Henry Kissinger, and George Shultz—a roll call of conservative troglodytes. Powell's refusal to sign is significant because Bolton most recently worked directly for Powell, and the omission clearly means that Powell does not think he is suited to the job.

Neither does anyone else with a scrap of common sense. Bolton is a narrow ideologue and American chauvinist whose belligerent stance toward international institutions is legendary—he once said that if the UN building "lost ten stories it wouldn’t make a bit of difference." He does not like to compromise, and his attitude toward negotiation is "I don’t do carrots"—he is all sticks.

Furthermore, he is not a team player. More than once while working for Powell, he defied his boss and made unauthorized statements, most notably in August 2001 when he threatened Russia with abrogation of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty—without approval and contrary to State Department policy.  Apparently Condoleezza Rice also found him difficult to work with, since she refused to give him a position in her State Department. As Steve Clemons puts it, "He is lustful for power and position, disdainful of process, and frequently sees it as his right and obligation to 'make his own weather' when it comes to foreign policy."

Finally, Bolton is incompetent. As undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, he allowed North Korea to quadruple its nuclear arsenal, rebuffed diplomatic feelers from Iran, and wrangled with Russia so that fewer fissile materials were secured than before his tenure. His job was to reduce the danger to Americans from terrorists and rogue states, and he failed.

Bush's nomination of Bolton is a pie in the face to Kofi Annan, Jacques Chirac, and Gerhard Schroeder—and to all sensible Americans, those who doubt that every problem can be solved with military force. But the nomination is so outrageous that it may fail. Senate hearings begin on Monday, and today Douglas Jehl and Steven R. Weisman report in the New York Times that Republican Senator Lincoln Chafee may vote against Bolton. Furthermore, Carl W. Ford Jr, former chief of the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, will testify against Bolton next week about his intimidation of intelligence officials who disagreed with him.

So there is hope that Bolton's nomination can be derailed because someone is listening to Colin Powell. We would all be safer.


The best single source of information about Bolton is Steve Clemons's blog The Washington Note; after reading his current posts, check out the March and April archives. I wrote an earlier note on Bolton here.

Update: The Times article also mentions a second State Department official who will testify against Bolton, Christian P. Westermann. Powell continues to decline comment on Bolton; on the other hand,

Former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell praised Mr. Westermann in 2003 for providing confidential testimony to the Senate intelligence panel about his disagreements on arms matters. Mr. Powell said he was "pleased" that Mr. Westermann had "honestly answered" when asked about pressure to describe undue influence on intelligence on Iraq.

Steve Clemons has some comments on that.

Comments

To tighten the Bolt on diplomacy's fate

A Bushing and a nut will have to mate.

They'll nail shut the U.N.'s world-wide gate

And we'll be hammered and screwed 'til 2008.

The comments to this entry are closed.