UN Ambassador John Bolton: GOP should force up or down vote while still in control

By: Steve Yuhas

As news was broke that current US Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, resigned because the US Senate refused to give him an up or down vote – the foreign press seemed to be the most confused and offended.  Most nations cannot understand how someone with majority support in the body that is required to confirm him cannot get approved to remain in the post that he has held with distinction since August 2005.  Of course, newspapers in North Korea, Iran and Syria were elated and that, in and of itself, should be a key signal to the Republicans that they should do anything in their power to keep Ambassador Bolton on board before they relinquish control in a few weeks.

Bolton was a recess appointment in August 2005 when President Bush realized that a few Senators were going to disallow him from having an up or down vote on the Senate floor.  The votes were there – he had the 51 votes required for confirmation, but since the Senate has decided under Democratic rules (when they’re in the minority) that every confirmation vote requires 60 Senators instead of the previously mandated 51 majority; Bolton never stood a chance.

Now Republicans are in the minority and it will be interesting to see how well they play the role of underdog while the Democrats attempt to ram through changes to everything from socialized medicine to increasing the minimum wage and an amnesty bill that would bestow citizenship on the between 12 and 20 million illegal immigrants in America today.

The United Nations is a dysfunctional body: this is the place that allowed some of the worst offenders of human rights to lead committees dealing with human rights, the same place that allowed millions of dollars to be stolen from the mouths of the Iraqi people under the Oil for Food program and the same body that has struggled with defining terrorism for decades – even though they use the word and were victims of it themselves.  This is also the same body that allowed the slaughters in Rwanda, the former Yugoslavia and now the Sudan to continue while they decide whether or not it is okay for Iran to get a nuke – something not very high on their priority list apparently.

John Bolton was a driving force at getting through some of the most important resolutions to pass the Security Council and through his leadership the United States was well represented.

On Monday the Bush administration accepted his resignation that will take effect when the Congress adjourns and the new Congress, led by Democrats and a coalition of Independents, will have the opportunity to declare a victory to their radical supporters that they destroyed the ability for John Bolton to have an up or down vote in the Senate.

What a great accomplishment – you can’t win by the vote so you decide not to take one; one can only hope that Republicans have learned the lessons that Democrats so effectively put into practice while they’ve been in the minority.  The GOP will have a lot of control if they follow the Democratic model of what they called “bi-partisanship.”

Last month the White House resubmitted Bolton’s nomination to be the US Ambassador to the UN only to be rebuffed by the incoming chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who saw no “point in considering Mr. Bolton's nomination again.”  Joe Biden, who is also beginning his run for President for 2008, decided unilaterally that despite the fact that Bolton had the votes on the floor that he did not deserve to even be voted on because some in the Senate found him to be too controversial.

Controversial to whom?  Dictators, despots and thug regimes that support terrorism and killing our troops and citizens no matter where they are; or how about any government that believes wiping Israel off the map is a good thing.  Neville Chamberlain would be proud. The United Nations apparatus has become a clearing house for scandal including everything from UN peacekeepers raping innocent civilians in Africa to the taking of bribes that goes all the way to Kofi Annan’s door (of not just his office, but his home in the form of his son).

Most of the world saw Bolton as a strong advocate for the positions of the Bush administration and as the political left and those that believed his temperament not to be “diplomatic enough” came out swinging when he was appointed – the people he worked with at the UN actually liked him and his style.

It seems that the only people opposed to John Bolton were those that did not work with him or those who were on the receiving end of a US veto at the Security Council and Senators inundated with far left wacko emails and letters demanding that they not vote to keep him on the Council.

John Bolton served the nation honorably for decades and for him not to be permitted an up or down vote in the Senate is wrong.  Republicans are still in control – even if only for a couple of weeks – and they could take the procedural step that would require a vote on his appointment, but for some reason they refuse to use what some call the “nuclear option” that would make a simple majority – the rule for centuries in the Senate – the required number of votes to confirm Bolton to the UN.

All of that aside it must be said that as other countries scratch their heads in wonder that an Ambassador of the United States is being treated like a low level political appointee without even having the courtesy of having a vote; states like Russia and China are filling their seats with the most anti-American members that they can.  The United States needs a strong leader to be in the chair at the Security Council and whether the left and the dictators of the world liked it or not – John Bolton was that leader.

Now he will leave public service to become a mere footnote in American history, but in the history of the struggles that faced the UN since he arrived in August 2005 his footnote was more like an explanation mark as he helped forge resolutions to force Iran and North Korea on their nuclear programs and he caused those who were skeptical of his appointment at first to reconsider and work closely with him.

It is now up to the Democratic controlled Senate to decide whether Bush’s new UN Ambassador will be a good choice or not.  If the litmus test is like that of John Bolton it means that if the nominee is acceptable to Iran and Syria, leftists and despots it is a good one and will pass with unanimous consent.

But, if it means a strong voice for America in the world body where tiny nations are treated almost the same way as America is then you can count on a weak ambassador who will go through hell to be confirmed.  Even then when a tough voice is needed at the UN it will not be there because the Senate will demand the Ambassador return to Washington to answer a bunch questions by people who care more about pleasing their leftist fringe than keeping America the preeminent voice on the Security Council.

Thank you for your service Ambassador Bolton and to those who stopped your confirmation because of politics – shame on you.

Steve Yuhas is a radio talk show host on NewsRadio 600 KOGO in southern California and may be reached at steve@steveyuhas.com or www.steveyuhas.com