Tuesday, March 08, 2005


Bolton Is The Perfect Choice

He's an American nationalist who will finally tell the UN what's what

I couldn't be happier about the nomination John Bolton to become the next US Ambassador to the UN. I'm especially pleased about his selection when I read comments like Fred Kaplan's:
The United Nations has its problems; it wouldn't be a bad thing for Bush to have appointed some hard-nosed arm-twister—say, a latter-day Daniel Patrick Moynihan—to run the U.S. mission. But Moynihan—or, for that matter, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Ronald Reagan's cage-rattler at the general assembly—had no problem with the concept of international law. Bolton, as a matter of principle, opposes everything about it.
Since the pernicious encroachment of 'international law' into our domestic affairs is a grave threat to our sovereignty and the principles upon which this counrty was founded, I'm ecstatic that someone who opposes the very concept of 'international law' will be in a position of influence at the UN. Kaplan goes on:
Here's where things get troublesome, not just for those who value international law but also on a purely pragmatic level. All the remarkable developments that have taken place lately, especially in the Middle East, may—in some cases, certainly will—have to be settled at the U.N. Security Council.
As the events of the past 3+ years have demonstrated, the notion that UN Security Council can settle anything important is ridiculous. The UN itself is of very little use to the US; indeed, I consider its continued existence to be a very real threat to this country.

I like Bryan Preston's take on the Bolton nomination:
Throughout his tenure as Undersecretary of State for Arms Control, Bolton has made all the right enemies, namely lefties like Sen. Barbara Boxer and pretty much the entire pro-UN chorus in Congress. But more important than which politicians despise him, our enemies abroad fear him. He has been one of the administration's leading hawks in dealing with Iran and North Korea, to the point that the latter refuses to meet with him anymore. If Kim Jong-Il hates you, you're the JYB's kind of guy. Around the UN, Bolton is known for criticizing its lackluster record in pretty much every area of its responsibility. He has gone after the UN for failing to enforce arms control agreements, for failing to deal with rogue states--you name it.

But the main reason I support Bolton is because he may go down in history as the man who destroyed the UN and replaced it with something better. Bolton is the architect of the Proliferation Security Initiative, about which no other publication has written more than this blog. The PSI is a major reason that Libya disarmed and shipped its nuclear weapons program to the US, and it is a major reason the North Korean weapons and technology smuggling industry isn't quite the growth industry Pyongyang wishes it were. And PSI, founded to deal with nuclear weapons proliferation because the UN and the IAEA had already failed in their related missions, unites most of the world's most important and influential democracies around a necessary project--stopping the spread of nuclear weapons among rogue states and terrorists. In time, the PSI could rise in relevance at the expense of both the UN and IAEA. If it does, it will be a good thing. And John Bolton will deserve most of the credit.
I sincerely hope he is right about Bolton destroying the UN. Ideally, he'll help discredit and destroy the International Criminal Court too. Unfortunately, he won't make much headway discrediting the concept of 'international law.' That will require a monumental and sustained effort on the part of conservatives to reform our courts, which is a subject for another time.

More on Bolton here and here (Via Polipundit)


<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?