The Discerning Texan

Another example is a so-called "memo to the Secretary of State" written for Foreign Policy magazine by Barbara Crossette, the long time UN correspondent for the New York Times and now a consulting editor at the United Nations Association of the United States of America. She wants the Secretary of State to reconsider Bolton’s re-nomination. Among Bolton’s sins, says Ms Crosette, is that "[At] the United Nations, Bolton has often overwhelmed and angered delegates from other countries…" Ms. Crossette’s case against Bolton is reported on an anti-Bolton site devoted to defeating Bolton’s re-nomination called Bolton Watch. http://boltonwatch.tpmcafe.com/

The one world government advocacy group Citizens for Global Solutions also opposes Bolton’s re-nomination, stating on its website: "Unfortunately, Bolton has seriously damaged the United States’ 60-year working relationship with the U.N. with less-than-diplomatic tactics; the results of which have led to a further diminution of American influence." click here

As a curious sidelight, it is interesting how interconnected some of these anti-Bolton groups turn out to be. For example, Scott Paul, one of the leaders of Bolton Watch, is currently Campaigns Manager at Citizens for Global Solutions.

What underlies these pathetic complaints about Ambassador Bolton’s performance is not really a concern about his style, but rather a debate over the degree to which the U.S. must bend its core principles to the lowest common denominator of ‘international consensus.’ Bolton’s opponents want to ensnare the United States in a web of multilateral institutional arrangements that would not only undermine U.S. sovereignty but would often be counterproductive. They want to slip UN misdeeds under the rug, pretending they never happened or are of little consequence.