John Bolton: Bush's Man to Blow Up the UN

by Mary

When George W Bush was wandering the country making the case for preemptive war, he made it clear that he was personally hostile to the United Nations. In the month leading up to the war he told his friends:

I came from Texas, and I'll go back to Texas. And in Midland, Texas, when I grew up, there were more signs saying 'Get us out of the UN' than there were saying 'God Bless America.' And there were plenty of 'God Bless America' signs.

As David Neiwert pointed out, the John Birch Society erected those signs and it's pretty clear that GWB agreed with the sentiments.

It is not hard to see that his hostility has extended into trying to destroy the institution that was created at the end of WWII by his nomination of John R Bolton as the ambassador to the UN. Is this another case of Bush trying to undo (and outdo) the legacy of FDR?

Nominating John Bolton for this role is an blatant indication that Bush cares nothing about the mission of the United Nations. The United Nations was formed after one of the world's worst and deadliest wars to try to build an institution that could help prevent future wars and to build a collaborative framework for the nations of the world to work on international problems that could not be solved in isolation.

Update: Steve Clemons asks that we help by calling the Senators and expressing our opposition to this nominee.

Call. . .Here are two numbers:

Senator Lincoln Chafee, Rhode Island (202) 224-2921

Senator Chuck Hagel, Nebraska, (202) 224-4224

Here is a list of other Senators on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee -- and frankly all of them could use calls. But if you have to focus, Feingold remains important -- and all of the Republicans are important and in my view, potential "gets" with the exception of Norm Coleman and George Allen.

John Bolton has made it clear he does not support the goals of the UN and his history has been that he does not believe in collaborative partnership. In his view, the only reason America should do anything is when it is in our interests. And he believes that only America should have a say in what the UN does. So not only does he not believe in common cause, he also is unwilling to consider that there might be reasons that we do something, because it is the right thing to do. Of course, part of that might come from the fact that he has made common cause with the far-right paranoid Christians who subscribe to the belief that the anti-Christ will be a UN peacemaker.

In many ways, John Bolton is just as bad of a pick for this role as Kerik was for the Home Land Security head. Sydney Blumenthal believes that this nomination is yet another grand experiment in cognitive dissonance.

Bush's latest experiment involves his appointment of John Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations. The cognitive dissonance being tested goes beyond the nominee's oft-stated contempt for the United Nations, and extends to his blatant efforts to twist intelligence. Bush's guinea pigs are the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and, as always, the American people.

Can the Republicans on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee keep themselves so enthralled by Bush that they will refuse to recognize how bad Bolton would be? It is very clear from the evidence that Bolton doesn't think he needs to follow an orders, rather he is the one who decides what policy the Bush administration follows.

The pattern that has emerged so far in the hearings is inescapable. Ever the realist, Brent Scowcroft, the elder Bush's national security advisor, lately fired by President Bush from the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, remarked last week at a Washington think tank: "How [Bolton] performs will depend on two things -- the instructions he gets -- and whether he will carry them out."

He is the original loose cannon.

Tonight the Washington Post reports that Bolton went so far as to keep important information from the Secretary of State (both Powell and now Rice) about Iran. Sometimes this information was held back for weeks and some of it was totally withheld. Powell has yet to answer a question about whether he would support a Bolton nomination, and this can only be because he would not. And what about Rice? Well, it seems that Rice isn't too pleased either:

Publicly, Rice has staunchly defended Bolton's credentials and urged the Senate to quickly confirm him. But privately, officials said, she has kept him out of key discussions on Iran since taking over in January.

If the Republicans on the Senate Foreign Relation committee vote for Bolton, then they too will be responsible for the damage done to the UN, to the US and for the wars that come from having a war monger and bomb thrower representing the US at the UN. We know from his past that Bolton would use his unique brand of diplomacy to alienate all of our allies and to isolate the US in more endless and pointless wars. And Bush will rack up another win on his way to a legacy of Worst. President. Ever.

One person that deserves special credit for his efforts at exposing the stench of this nomination is Steve Clemons who has devoted enormouse efforts on his blog, The Washington Note to educating the media and the Senators on John Bolton's past. Let's hope the latest exposures of his outright insubordination will shame more than just Senator Hagel (who is wavering) to stand up against the cynical ploy of the Bush administration to do real damage to the UN.