A Comment on Bolton
President Bush made the right call in appointing John Bolton as the US representative to the UN. Critics of the move seem to have more affection for the UN than for the US, and the criticism of Bolton descended to the petty. I'd hate to have a man in that office who had a reputation for being nice. Nice is not what a corruption-ridden organization needs. Nice people, unwilling to get involved, let the Srebenica massacre happen.
Here's the opinon of Ian Williams, writing at The Nation.
A quote:
...although Bush is by no means the first President to abuse the prerogative, it is clear that recess appointments were meant to be be used in cases of unexpected emergencies, not to bypass the confirmation process.
In Williams's view, recess appointments are only alright if made by Democrat Presidents. However, I'd say that the sudden lurch of the Senate Democrats to the left may qualify as an unexpected emergency, especially since Democrats seem to have more sympathy for a corrupt non-working UN, and the tyrannical governments who have weaseled their way into power there, than for America itself.
Another quote:
Almost as worrying is the implicit message of encouragement to the know-nothings on the extreme right of the Republican Party, who get their news and geography from Rush Limbaugh and Fox, and see the UN as a cabal of gun-reforming, gay-liberating, abortion-peddling, US Constitution-undermining foreigners.
Fits for me, though I don't get my news from Rush Limbaugh, as he's a commentator. The UN did try to do a gun grab several years ago, and it was only stopped because President Bush sent a strong person there to say our Second Amendment would not be compromised. The UN pushes abortion with its family-planning programs, and supports China's one-child policy. To the list I could add that the UN is anti-Semitic (a conference was in progress back in 2001, on 9-11 in fact, which would have equated Zionism with racism), incompentent (Srebenica for example), and pro-tyranny. Several tyrannical governments hold special positions within the body. Sudan for example is on the UN Commission for Human Rights. Slavery and genocide, both of which are done in Sudan, are incompatible with the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights. If the UN had any ability to pass meaningful judgment, Sudan would be kicked off this Commission, along with many others.
Do we need a critic of the UN as the US ambassador to the UN? Of course we do.
Posted by Joel Fuhrmann at August 3, 2005 07:58 AM