So Much for Excellence: John Bolton Steps Down
Ambassador John Bolton, the most effective U.N. Ambassador the United States has had in two decades, has announced that he will step down when his current term ends. His remarkable accomplishments on Resolutions 1695 and 1718 on North Korea, Resolution 1706 on Darfur, and his valiant efforts at reform all notwithstanding, Bolton became a victim of partisanship and a target of UN-topians for his refusal to acquiesce to evil or surrender U.S. interests to its foes. Although no Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee was willing to give Bolton’s performance or qualifications a fair hearing, or offer any compelling reason to oppose him, we should long remember that it was Lincoln Chafee and Richard Lugar who actually stabbed Bolton in the back for the dubious, and ultimately fruitless, cause of saving Chafee’s Senate seat. We will never know how the full Senate would have voted. Bolton, to his credit, didn’t really didn’t seem to care. When I met with Amb. Bolton for 30 minutes last year, to talk about famine and human rights in North Korea, I sensed that he didn’t think he’d be confirmed, and I’ve heard others who knew him say the same. My lasting impressions of John Bolton as a person were of his factual precision, his command of the issues, his application of common sense to complex problems, and his sense of humor.
Whatever relevence ancient questions about Bolton’s “management style” had in relation to his qualifications to serve should not have persisted after that sterling record, but this is Washington. John Bolton will be missed, and both America and the United Nations will be worse off without him. During his tenure, the United Nations, ever so briefly, worked as it was intended — as a reasonably effective, nonviolent way to check the actions of thugs and killers. If the U.N. collapses back into the corruption and fecklessness that marked most of the Kofi Annan and Boutros-Ghali eras, the widespread disillusionment of the American people with the U.N. will increase, and this country will return to doing what it did under the Clinton Administration and what most other Security Council members have done all along: pursue their interests without a second thought of a U.N. debate.
Given the awful performance of the new, “reformed” U.N. Human Rights Council, and the emerging desire of South Korea and China to ignore Resolution 1718, President Bush will need to nominate someone just as confrontational as John Bolton to save that institution from its own worst elements. Can you say, “Ambassador Santorum?”
[typos fixed]
15 Responses
-
Pingback: Stop The ACLU
-
Pingback: Bolton to Resign at ROK Drop
I’m hearing that Jim Leach might be a choice.
That’s interesting information.
Given some of Leach’s recent comments about Iraq, I’d be surprised at that, and somewhat disappointed, too, notwithstanding his generally good record on North Korean human rights issues. I just don’t think Leach is tough enough to do what needs to be done at the UN.
I like the Santorum idea. He seems smart and confrontational enough to get things done at the UN.
I doubt Santorum has anywhere near the foreign policy grasp that Bolton deployed so well.
He gave a pretty good speech on Islamic terror near the end of his campaign, I hear. Personally, I’m not a great fan of all of Santorum’s positions on social policy, but the whole professional courtesy angle appeals to me, with Santorum being a former senator and all. Unless Biden and Dodd just hate his guts, of course. In which case, it would be petty and it would look petty.
In the end, Bolton had to go. Changing UN rep makes it appear that we are “serious” about diplomacy. So why not? Kim Jong Il’s days are numbered, and it doesn’t seem likely anything of real substance will be achieved. I don’t think it really matters if a left leaning diplomat was in the hot seat as opposed to a right winger. Even a democrat in a whitehouse won’t make a difference at this point.
As long as 1: we make it clear that we won’t invade them, 2: if they do sell nuke technology abroad, we will attack unilaterally if we must. Don’t shake the boat, just watch KJI topple all by himself. So Bolton, no Bolton, who cares?
Placate DPRK with meaningless changes in diplomats as much as he desires. Placate regional partners with as much meaningless talks as it is required. Don’t shake the boat. As long as KJI doesn’t wage war when he topples, we win.
Wonder what he’ll do now?
I for one hopes he:
1. Writes a scathing tell all book and exposes the inner workings (and names names) of the sorid underworld that is the UNSC; and
2. Makes himself available for interviews and such to provide a clear and comprehensive take on the latest issues.
Please John, do not disappear into that good night…
Is placating foe and friend alike through meaningless diplomatic changes and meaningless talk even worthy of consideration as a policy? Is this proposal another way of saying that diplomacy itself is meaningless?
Is it reasonable to expect a wicked dictator to simply topple all by himself? Do we have any historical precedent for such an event? What about the evil that he perpetuates while we wait for him to fall on his own accord? How do we know that letting events take their own direction will not lead to the replacement of one terrible tyrant with another?
Mr. Broughton,
When KJI topples, I don’t think it will be far from entirely happy news. But there is an unstoppable flow of information into DPRK at this point to assume DPRK residents will happily go along with the flow indefinitely–even when it’s very clear at this point that KJI is losing power–is unreasonable. Information blockade has been the key to DPRK remarkable longevity. Why do we need to point out to precedence when Cuba is the only remaining communist country?
Now I am left leaning, and I don’t see eye to eye with Joshua at all; Clinton has been far more intelligent about this than Bush jr. by far. Considering whitehouse wasn’t willing to engage with DPRK at all, I think it’s a vast improvement that they are willing to at least make it appear that they are doing something. But I think more importantly, the times are extremely tense right now, and we need to give KJI every reason not to attack.
We gave DPRK plenty of time and resources to experiment with reforms, of which they did none. I applaud the efforts of the sunshine policy, but at this point, we have to admit that it failed. Kim Dae Jung claims that we need to bend for KJI, because right to life is the greatest human rights issue we must consider. But at this point, I recognize two things:
1. South Korea does not have enough financial resources to placate DPRK from doing the inevitable.
2.United States will not cave in to nuclear black mail.
The right to life that Kim Dae Jung so desperately want to uphold by politically supporting now floundering Roh Moo Hyun, is not something that he has the power to uphold. Only Kim Jong Il has the power of life and death. Despite ROK and China shielding DPRK at every opportunity, DPRK has failed to make any, even minor reforms.
For the same reason why sanctions don’t work, economic reforms are bad for KJI. Waiting out for KJI to topple has been the de facto American policy towards DPRK since Ronald Reagan’s time, and is the only choice we have left. Clinton did it. Bush jr has been doing it all along.
How long will it take for KJI to topple? Let’s consider the following facts:
1.Through cell phones, families of defectors residing in DPRK has better outside news than DPRK security operatives whose source of outside information is either Rodong Shinmun or illicit materials they cease from those they torment.
2.Pyong Yang teenagers are emulating South Korean fashion.
3.Residents along the North Korean borders all watch MBC soap operas.
4.PDS has collapsed and people are resorting to market system.
5.winter is coming, and there appears to be shortage of food. We can expect ROK and China to provide the vast bulk of food, but in a catastropically inefficient and corrupt country like DPRK, we should still expect famine deaths. We already have reports of rampant infectious disease spreading.
We have to prepare for the inevitable.