Bolton Down the Hatches Posted by Suzanne Nossel

The latest word from the WashPost is that Bolton is now saying he'd deign to accept a recess appointment.  Offering him one is bad idea on an array of fronts, as I wrote last week in The Prospect.

Stygius (whoever that is, exactly), asked me for my take on a side-note in the Post piece, reporting that Bolton was seeking to enlarge the office suite allotted to the so-called USUN-W, the Washington office of the U.S. Ambassador to the UN.  The Post reported that:

Two months ago, while his confirmation was in trouble, Bolton began efforts to double the office space reserved within the State Department for the ambassador to the United Nations, according to three senior department officials who were involved in handling the request.

Previous ambassadors have kept a small staff in Washington in a modest suite. Bolton told several colleagues he needs more space and a larger staff in Washington because, if confirmed, he intends to spend more time here than his predecessors did.

"Bolton isn't going to sit in New York while policy gets made in Washington," the administration source said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because the source lacks authorization to discuss this on the record. But Bolton's efforts to obtain more space have encountered resistance. Two colleagues said Bolton's request was inappropriate because he had not been confirmed.

My take is this:

- USUN-W is an important office, because - as I lay out in the Prospect piece - a key element of the UN Ambassadorship is to not just represent the U.S. at the UN, but also to represent the UN's interests and concerns to official Washington.  The State Department office takes the lead on this;

- Bolton's move, however, raises several concerns:

1.  That, contrary to Condi Rice's promise that Bolton will be kept on a tight leash, if appointed Bolton intends to make the most of his contacts and sway in Washington.

2.  Bolton intends to focus heavily on Washington even though, with no U.S. perm rep at the UN for 6 months and the U.S.'s influence at the world body and with our allies around the world in question, the efforts of the ambassador must be trained on repairing relations with other countries and advocating U.S. positions and policies to the UN membership.

3.  Despite all the misgivings about Bolton's high-handedness and power-mongering, there's not the faintest sign of repentance on his part.   This latest maneuver - done while Bolton's nomination was on the rocks - signals just the opposite.

Comments

[rosignol]

1. That, contrary to Condi Rice's promise that Bolton will be kept on a tight leash, if appointed Bolton intends to make the most of his contacts and sway in Washington.

Do you honestly expect anyone who gets the job to not "make the most of his contacts and sway in Washington"?

Please, refrain from insulting the intelligence of your readers.

2. Bolton intends to focus heavily on Washington even though, with no U.S. perm rep at the UN for 6 months and the U.S.'s influence at the world body and with our allies around the world in question, the efforts of the ambassador must be trained on repairing relations with other countries and advocating U.S. positions and policies to the UN membership.

...in a similar vein, the US's influence with our allies- the real ones, not the ones who just claim to be our allies- has very little to do with if the US has a permanent representative at the UN, and quite a lot to do with how their relationship with the US serves their national interest.

To point out one example: Israel may appreciate the US's SC vetos on their behalf, but everyone who is aware of the facts on the ground knows that it doesn't really matter, as Israel's nuclear arsenal is the real guarantor of Israel's security, not the US's veto in the SC. By vetoing idiocy, the US mainly protects the UN from embarassing itself, not Israel.

3. Despite all the misgivings about Bolton's high-handedness and power-mongering, there's not the faintest sign of repentance on his part. This latest maneuver - done while Bolton's nomination was on the rocks - signals just the opposite.

What does he have to repent for? The sin of not genuflecting before various progressive foreign-policy shibboleths?

[doc]

unforgiving, i know, but my take is that bolton is just another pig come to the wdc trough.

rosignol –

"3. Despite all the misgivings about Bolton's high-handedness and power-mongering..."

above the author describes the attributes she believes (and, frankly, most the civilized world believes) are not desirable in a diplomat. thus, the latter half of the sentence...

"...there's not the faintest sign of repentance on his part..."

explains the author's reservations about the individual. your response to the author…

"What does he have to repent for? The sin of not genuflecting before various progressive foreign-policy shibboleths?"

…does not, of course, speak to anything in the sentence. instead it propounds an inference, one not described by the author's words.

your response to point 1…

“Do you honestly expect anyone who gets the job to not "make the most of his contacts and sway in Washington"?
Please, refrain from insulting the intelligence of your readers. “

…is deliberately obtuse: we expect our public servants, and those appointed by them, to perform their duties to the best of their abilities. that does NOT, however, include “high-handedness and power-mongering”. to assume such pettiness of our public servants [and their emissaries], as a day-to-day m.o. risks a greater ceding of all responsibility by our public servants: you tacitly empower them to do as they wish.

that you do not see or understand this notion made me realize something i’ve wondered about for a while – you are still in your teens. that’s not necessarily a bad thing – we all went through that phase (some more than others, i will admit). i would note, however, that while you are obviously bright for your age, you are also often downright rude when there is no reason to be; ease up a little.

and try reading the posts more than once – it helps!

[rosignol]

The Author's misgivings regarding 'high-handedness and power-mongering' are criticisms of style, not substance.

I expect my public servants to do the job, and the job is to get results. If being liked gets results, fine, if being 'high-handed' and engaging in 'power-mongering' gets results, I can live with that, too.

As you may have guessed, I consider substance more important than style, and just about all of the criticism of Bolton that I've heard is of his style. The man gets results, and he does so in a field where results are famously hard to come by.

With regards to my age- if you're going to be condescending, do it to someone else. Yes, my style is brusque, blunt, and deliberately provocative. This is not unusual for someone who spent over a decade in the eternal floating flamewars of usenet, but if it helps, my tone is generally intended to be dry, not angry. It is difficult to convey this in a purely text medium.

[doc]

rosignol -

i believe you misunderstand: 'high-handedness and power-mongering' IS the substance of bolton, hence the misgivings.

vis a vis your age - no, i truly thought you were a teenager; regardless of how you intend to present yourself, what comes across is an angry churlishness that i associate with teenagers.

[yargıc]

Thank you for your sharing.! seslichat seslisohbet

[cheap coach handbags]

Thank you for your sharing! I like i very much!

[rokettube]

en güzel rokettube videoları,
en muhteşem sex izleme sitesi
en kral rokettube yeri
kaliteli pornoların bulunduğu tek mekan
yabancı sitelerden özenle seçilmiş muhteşem ötesi porn sitesi...
yar