Lifestyle > Train of Thought
59 Ex US Diplomats Protest The Nomination Of John Bolton As Ambassador To The UN
Don Rizzle:
Ex-US diplomats round on Bolton
Fifty-nine former US diplomats have written to the chairman of a key Senate committee in protest at the nomination of John Bolton as ambassador to the UN.
The diplomats, who served under both Republican and Democrat presidents, described Mr Bolton, a known critic of the UN, as "the wrong man" for the job.
They urged the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to block his appointment.
Mr Bolton served as under-secretary of state responsible for arms control during President Bush's first term.
Chief among the objections was Mr Bolton's stated view that the UN "is valuable only when it directly serves the United States".
Veterans object
In addition, Mr Bolton was criticised for his record as US arms control supremo.
He had an "exceptional record" of undermining potential improvements to US national security through arms control, the diplomats complained.
Among the most senior signatories was Arthur Hartman, former ambassador to France and the Soviet Union under Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan and assistant secretary of state for European affairs under President Richard Nixon.
John R Bolton cannot be an effective promoter of the US national interest at the UN.
Ex-diplomats' letter
Princeton Lyman, a former ambassador to South Africa and Nigeria, Monteagle Stearns, US representative in Greece and Ivory Coast, and Spurgeon Keeny Jr, Jimmy Carter's deputy director of arms control, also signed the letter.
Mr Bolton requires approval from the foreign relations committee - made up of 10 Republicans and eight Democrats - before being told he can head to the UN's New York headquarters.
Announcing his nomination at the start of March, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice described him as a "tough-minded diplomat" with "a proven track record of effective multilateralism".
But the former diplomats insist his hard-line views on states such as Cuba and Syria, as well as previous paid employment for the government of Taiwan, make him an unsuitable candidate.
"Given these past actions and statements, John R Bolton cannot be an effective promoter of the US national interest at the UN," they wrote.
"We urge you to oppose his nomination."
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/americas/4389639.stm
In my opinion it is very counter productive to place him as the abassidor to the UN when he has previously been very negative about the UN.
Don Seer:
depends upon what the US wants to acheieve with the UN.. with certain things in mind he'd be perfect.. for destablisation ;)
Don Rizzle:
the un is discussing reform and america sends him, america must learn they cannot dictate everything, and they all too often alienate their allies by their policies
AndrE16686:
Looking foward to Kofi reforming the security council. Hopefully it will create global stabilization and losen US grip on the globe. I think Japan is being nominated, but China and Korea are having a bitch about it. But they know Japan will oppose China's commie bullshit so they are having a whine about it, fucking commies....
King Tech Quadafi:
--- Quote from: AndrE JosE on April 14, 2005, 05:53:02 AM ---Looking foward to Kofi reforming the security council. Hopefully it will create global stabilization and losen US grip on the globe. I think Japan is being nominated, but China and Korea are having a bitch about it. But they know Japan will oppose China's commie bullshit so they are having a whine about it, fucking commies....
--- End quote ---
or because those Chinese havent forgotten for a single second over the last 70 years what those Japanese did to them in WW2?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version