Bolton - It was his success in defense of American and democratic interests that doomed him.
The only winners from the resignation of U.S. ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton are the foes of the United States. Ambassador Bolton did a courageous job communicating and protecting American values in the belly of a beast where those values are at risk each and every day. His commitment to real and effective reform was unshakable. His honesty, integrity, and hard work produced substantial results on a multiplicity of levels in only 18 months on the job. He spearheaded the adoption of a first legally binding Security Council resolution sanctioning North Korea for its nuclear-weapons program; passage of a first ever Security Council resolution addressing the Iranian nuclear program; consensus-building among democratic states that resulted in 50 donor countries, responsible for 88 percent of the U.N. regular budget, taking a common position on management reform.
Furthermore, he:
had the foresight to refuse to lend credibility to the U.N. Human Rights Council, which as he predicted, has become a mockery of reform undeserving of American support;
raised the profile of the genocide in Darfur and insisted on Security Council action;
led the campaign against corruption at the U.N. secretariat, including the reduction of the gift ceiling for United Nations officials from $10,000 to $200;
defended a free and democratic government of Israel from the relentless onslaught of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic attacks launched across the U.N. system.
Ultimately, it was his success in defense of American and democratic interests that doomed him. No one was more vociferous in campaigning against his nomination than the defenders of the status quo — Secretary General Kofi Annan, his deputy Mark Malloch-Brown, and their financial backers, George Soros and Ted Turner’s U.N. Foundation. One can be sure they will have broken out the champagne, along with the Russians, Chinese, Sudanese, and the remainder of the Organization of the Islamic Conference — all those who have a vested interest in ensuring a neverending cycle of U.S. money in, support for terrorism and nuclear proliferation out. The reverberations of the departure of John Bolton will be felt for a long time to come.
— Anne Bayefsky is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and at Touro College Law Center. She is also editor of www.EyeontheUN.org. National Review
Furthermore, he:
had the foresight to refuse to lend credibility to the U.N. Human Rights Council, which as he predicted, has become a mockery of reform undeserving of American support;
raised the profile of the genocide in Darfur and insisted on Security Council action;
led the campaign against corruption at the U.N. secretariat, including the reduction of the gift ceiling for United Nations officials from $10,000 to $200;
defended a free and democratic government of Israel from the relentless onslaught of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic attacks launched across the U.N. system.
Ultimately, it was his success in defense of American and democratic interests that doomed him. No one was more vociferous in campaigning against his nomination than the defenders of the status quo — Secretary General Kofi Annan, his deputy Mark Malloch-Brown, and their financial backers, George Soros and Ted Turner’s U.N. Foundation. One can be sure they will have broken out the champagne, along with the Russians, Chinese, Sudanese, and the remainder of the Organization of the Islamic Conference — all those who have a vested interest in ensuring a neverending cycle of U.S. money in, support for terrorism and nuclear proliferation out. The reverberations of the departure of John Bolton will be felt for a long time to come.
— Anne Bayefsky is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and at Touro College Law Center. She is also editor of www.EyeontheUN.org. National Review
Comments