Bellicose BOLTON VS. UNITED NATIONS & the Rest of the World:
Conspiring for SHOCK & AWE #2?
By Dr. John O. Sutter

After serving as an Under Secretary of State (for Arms Control & International Security), in the first term of the Bush-Cheney Administration, and as a hard-working ideologue of the Project for a New American Century (read: "Empire"), John Bolton aspired to something higher. After all, didn't Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, who championed the American War Against Iraq, get promoted to head the World Bank, in spite of misgivings by other member countries? And hadn't he, as Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs during the Bush-Quayle Administration, done his damnedest to keep ideas of others for positive reforms of the United Nations from coming before the public?
What do I mean by this last question? Well, back in 1987 Congress enacted Public Law 100-204 to establish a bipartisan U.S Commission on Improving the Effectiveness of the United Nations. Representative Jim Leach (R-Iowa) had sponsored the bill,which was drafted with some World Federalist input. Sixteen commissioners were to be appointed -- 12 by the Democratic and Republican leaders of the Senate and House -- and 4 by the President. On the assumption that President Ronald Reagan's successor would be more sympathetic to the U.N., the appointments were to be accomplished within 4 months of the inauguration of the new president. This turned out to be George H.W. Bush, a former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N.
Although the leaders in Congress chose their commissioners on time, the presidential appointees were held up for three years! Not until early 1992 -- a year and a half after the Commission was scheduled to complete its hearings across the country and submit its report to the President and the Congress -- could it finally act! What was the bottleneck? Asst. Secretary Bolton. When I wrote him in 1991 for the cause of the delay, his response was "We are [still] reviewing the matter of the Commission." With possibly grandiose ideas of his own intelligence, did he feel it unnecessary to allow the views about the U.N. of the American public, including scholars and civil society leaders, to be aired?
Thanks to his mentor, the Armageddonist and U.N.-basher Jesse Helms, no funds were appropriated for the work of the Commission (possibly the only time a commission was so hampered). Consequently, funds had to be raised privately both for the operation of the commission office in Washington, DC and for the half dozen public hearings around the country. World Federalists played an important role in the hearings. Like colleagues in other cities, we helped organize and raise $13,000 for the Commission's hearing in San Francisco
Walter F. Hoffmann, former Executive Director of the World Federalist Association, was appointed as one of the commissioners and as Co-Treasurer. Unfortunately, in addition to pro-U.N. Congressman Leach, House Minority Leader Robert Michel appointed two anti-U.N. leaders from the Heritage Foundation. One was Charles Lichenstein, who revealed his attitude toward the U.N. by his infamous wish that the U.N. would close down and sail (from Manhattan) off into the sunset! Although it had been expected that Leach would chair the Commission, the U.N. detractors succeeded in choosing Lichenstein as Co-Chair. The Commission's lukewarm report was entitled “Defining Purpose: The U.N. and the Health of Nations.”
In February 1994 the Third Global Structures Convocation on "Human Rights, Global Governance, and Strengthening the U.N." was organized by the W.F.A. in Crystal City, Virginia, with William Pace as its Director. In contrast to many World Federalist and other speakers promoting a reformed U.N. was John Bolton. (His U.N. bashing was captured on video and shown at the hearing of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee by Senator Barbara Boxer, D-California in April 2005.) During the Q & A, I asked Bolton why he had held up the working of the U.S. Commission for so long. His disingenuous reply was to blame the delay on the Office of Management & Budget -- which could hardly have been involved, for no federal funds had been appropriated!
But why Bolton to the U.N. now? His own first choice was undoubtedly to be promoted to Deputy Secretary of State, where he could "help" Secretary Condoleeza Rice run the department. Wanting no part of this, she was only too happy to endorse him for Ambassador to the U.N. But how messy can things get? Reportedly in October 2004 President Bush had requested a Pentagon plan for an attack on Iran in June 2005 if Iran wouldn't cease enriching uranium. The Iranians claim that this is for its electric power plants. Meanwhile, Israel -- which, while refusing to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty, has developed its own secret nuclear weapons -- is reportedly threatening to bomb suspected future nuclear weapons sites in Iran in June. At the same time, the U.S. Administration, while threatening sanctions against Iran, may be preparing to take military action (as reportedly recommended by Cheney to preclude any disastrous fallout from an Israeli strike), if the U.N. does not approve harsh sanctions. Who better to work on the U.N. and delegates from other countries at that time than John Bolton, who has long been calling for taking action against Iran?
Wouldn't it make more sense to develop a democratic world federation with representation from all of the world's peoples for the benefit of the people of the world -- to preclude conflicts between nations whose leaders are programmed to think primarily of their own country's perceived self interests?