|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Senate Likely to Confirm Bolton for U.N. Slot, Lawmakers Say; International Analysts React
The U.S. Senate will probably confirm President George W. Bush’s pick for the next U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Undersecretary of State John Bolton, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, March 8). At least all eight Democrats and one Republican on the 18-member Senate Foreign Relations Committee would have to vote against Bolton to keep his nomination from reaching the full Senate, lawmakers and aides told the Times. The only potential Republican no vote on the committee is believed to be Senator Lincoln Chafee (R.I.), who noted in a statement that Bolton had been an “outspoken critic” of the United Nations, but added that, “I have been assured that he will bring a more balanced approach to his new role.” “I think we want to know how he will approach his responsibilities,” said committee Chairman Richard Lugar (R-Ind.). While Lugar is expected to vote for Bolton, according to Senate aides, he had concerns about the strength of Bolton’s support for U.S. efforts to secure WMD materials in former Soviet states (Weisman/Hulse, New York Times, March 9). Some international analysts criticized Bolton’s nomination. “This is really going to reopen all of the worst suspicions [in Europe] about the Bush administration’s refusal to engage in effective multilateralism,” said Francois Heisbourg, director of the Foundation for Strategic Research in Paris. Others said the choice indicated Bush’s intent to reform the United Nations. “Bolton takes a very dim view of the U.N.,” said Robert McGeehan, an analyst at the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London. “He, with a lot of others, feels that the degree of corruption is out of control, and that (Secretary General) Kofi Annan is doing very little about it.” Bolton’s nomination indicates that advocates of a more aggressive U.S. foreign policy are gaining influence in the White House, some analysts in the Middle East said. “This is an extremely bad message that Bush has submitted to the neoconservatives,” said Imad Shoueibi, a Syrian political analyst in Damascus. “They should have a more moderate figure representing them at the United Nations, but instead they have one of the most radical.” The United States still needs assistance in stabilizing Iraq, which could force Bolton to work with the United Nations, said Eberhard Sandschneider, an analyst at the German Council on Foreign Relations. “He will have to cooperate,” he said. Others cautioned against assuming that Bolton’s nomination meant Bush would not move toward increased multilateralism. “It is important to remember that foreign policy is decided by President Bush and the secretary of state. The U.N. ambassador just puts it into practice,” said Svein Melby, a research fellow at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs in Oslo. “If it is a signal about anything, it is that the demands from the United States for reforms at the U.N. are serious because they have sent an ambassador who is critical of the U.N.” (Beth Gardiner, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, March 8).
| ||||||||||
Back to top
