More Thoughts on Bolton and the UN
Endlessly, the Democrats and their liberal media accomplices have been demanding additional Bolton documents in order to prove his dangerousness as the Bush-appointed Ambassador to the UN. Truthfully, all the requests for documents or tearful blathering of Senators like Voinovich are is a smokescreen to stall and tempt Bush to either re-nominate someone “more qualified” or make a public gaffe.
Bolton is so strenously fought against precisely because of his potential to rectify the problems within the UN by asserting American interests above the UN and withdrawing from the multilateral bullcrap and internationalist prism that bogs down the UN (in addition to the unfettered corruption).
In 1997, John Bolton authored an article on UN reform that is reflects the raison d’etre for the Libs hate and remonstrance toward his nomination. The article entitled “The Creation, Fall, Rise, and Fall of the United Nations” was part of a collaboration by a Cato Institute scholar called “Delusions of Grandeur: The United Nations and Global Intervention.” Bolton’s article reflects a sharpness of tongue and blunt manner that must have sent a few internationalists into a fit of global rage.
Bolton begins his article: “American foreign policy must be based on identifying our vital interests and then advancing and defending those interests around the world.” Bolton’s premise–that American interests are supreme–reverberates throughout his article. Bolton refuses to accept the UN as a moral leader and accuses the UN of “trash[ing] our values.” Bolton also gallantly asserts that some nations votes are carry less weight than others. In other words, the vote of the U.S. should not carry the equivalent weight as Madagascar’s.
Most important, Bolton defines the proper role of the UN: an instrument–not a source–of U.S. interests. “The UN [is] an instrument of U.S. policy, not the policy itself.” And to top it off, Bolton says that the role of the UN Secretary-General does not include “Mr. Friend of the Earth.” These qualities of clarity and statemanship are impeding Bolton’s progress. In other words, by verbalizing an “America First” approach, Bolton is U.N enemy number one. Heaven forbid that the U.S. Ambassador profess love of his country’s interests above those of the world community (which includes terrorist dictatorships and socialist quagmires). Bolton concludes as he begins:
The UN . . . is not worth the sacrifice of American troops, American freedom of action, or American interests.
Sadly, boldly declaring American interests is Bolton’s handicap. Regardless of the outcome, Bolton’s nomination illustrates that the Senate Democrats–and the Democratic Party in toto–prefer a UN Ambassador with a internationalist communitarian approach and not a pro-America, “America First” approach. Bolton is a true American–not some Frenchy-French substitute.