Welcome to the UN, Mr. Bolton
John Bolton arrived in Turtle Bay with the full support of the President behind him and a full plate in front of him: Oil-for-whatever and general UN corruption; Iraq’s military, political and economic redevelopment; Iran’s progress on nuclear capability; North Korea; Darfur; Kosovo; the spread of Islamic fundamentalism in Central Asia, particularly Uzbekistan; AIDS in Africa; ties between al Qaeda and drug cartels in South America; Mozambique; Haiti; Syria; and the usual proliferation of anti-Israel propaganda. Makes you wonder why he wanted the job.
John Bolton arrived in Turtle Bay with the full support of the President behind him and a full plate in front of him: Oil-for-whatever and general UN corruption; Iraq’s military, political and economic redevelopment; Iran’s progress on nuclear capability; North Korea; Darfur; Kosovo; the spread of Islamic fundamentalism in Central Asia, particularly Uzbekistan; AIDS in Africa; ties between al Qaeda and drug cartels in South America; Mozambique; Haiti; Syria; and the usual proliferation of anti-Israel propaganda. Makes you wonder why he wanted the job.
Our guess is that he wanted it because despite its flaws, which are legion, the UN represents a mechanism for trying to solve problems. We hope he will be, and expect him to be, an activist ambassador in the best sense of can-do, forward-thinking American policy, working with like-minded countries in a variety of ways. As, in fact, he has done before. The Proliferation Security Initiative – Mr. Bolton’s brainchild with more than 20 members patrolling the seas to prevent the proliferation of non-conventional weapons parts and capabilities – is a vastly under-appreciated feat of multilateral cooperation.
We admit, though, that his first move surprised us. On his first full day on the job, Amb. Bolton and Chinese Ambassador Wang Guangya announced that they would work together to block the G-4 plan for enlarging the Security Council.
For years the UN has debated plans for enlarging the Security Council (5 permanent members with a veto and 10 rotating non-permanent members). Brazil, Germany, India and Japan (the G-4) are calling for a 25-member council adding six permanent seats without a veto and four nonpermanent seats. They want four of the permanent seats with the other two for Africa. [The African Union proposes 26 members with six more permanent seats with veto power and five non-permanent seats. A third plan would add 10 non-permanent seats.]
On second thought, this was an excellent first choice.
The problems of the UN are not rooted in the composition of the Security Council. They are rooted in corruption, the “voting bloc” system, the relentless focus on Israel, and the belief of many countries that what they do in the UN doesn’t matter – leading to such awful anomalies as Zimbabwe and Saudi Arabia on the Human Rights Commission. Adding members to the Security Council would make it more unwieldy and beholden to regional voting blocs, papering over the need for substantive changes to the whole system including the General Assembly and the Commission structure.
Aside from the practical reasons not to support the G-4 or other plans, there is much to be said for a moment of public agreement with China, a country that presents enormous challenges to the U.S. in various spheres. To have our point persons at the UN find common cause in various spheres can do nothing but improve our dialogue on the more difficult issues that surely will follow. Mr. Bolton’s first public declaration from his new position is that of a seasoned veteran diplomat – nothing less than we would have expected.