The letter below, opposing the nomination of John R. Bolton to serve as permanent U.S. representative to the United Nations, is signed by 64 former U.S. diplomats, State Department officials:
Quote:
In the spring of 2005, the signers of this message sent members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee a letter warning that the egotistical intolerance, past activities and statements of Under Secretary of State John Bolton showed conclusively that he was an unsuitable candidate for confirmation as permanent representative of the United States at the United Nations. We were concerned it would be impossible for him to elicit the willing cooperation of representatives of other UN member states in support of projects of interest to the United States....
In September 2005, as a major two-year reform effort at the United Nations was nearing a final vote, Mr. Bolton suddenly introduced 705 individual U.S. amendments. This action encouraged other countries to introduce spoiling amendments of their own. In the resulting melee, several points proposed by the U.S. were eliminated from the draft....
For several years, a primary U.S. objective has been to eliminate the UN Human Rights Commission, where regular regional rotation had brought rights violators like Sudan and Libya into commission membership. General Assembly president Jan Eliasson of Sweden made changing this situation a personal objective. Against considerable opposition from defenders of the old system, he finally cobbled together a workable compromise for a new Human Rights Council. Given the importance of this issue, Mr. Bolton should have worked closely with General Assembly President Eliasson and South Africa's Ambassador Dumisano Kumaro to ensure a positive outcome. Instead, he absented himself from the General Assembly working group working on the details of the new Human Rights Council, attending only one of 35 working sessions...... The Swiss ambassador described Mr. Bolton's behavior on this entire issue as :intransigent and maximalist." John Bolton's unilateralist approach has alienated the bulk of the diplomatic community and cost the United States its leadership role with the UN on this important issue.
http://www.diplomatsagainstbolton.com/
|