[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Editorial See other Editorial Articles Title: While The Hawks Take Flight, Bush Finds His Wings Clipped THE resignation of John Bolton as United States ambassador to the United Nations is the latest sign that the George Bush ascendancy is faltering. The US President may still have two years left to go of his incumbency, but this departure, following on from the resignation of his Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld, shows how his arc of influence is diminishing. The resignation of Mr Bolton can be seen charitably as compromise in politics at work. Mr Bolton went to the UN late last year as a "recess appointment", which means without Senate approval. His nomination had caused a storm of protest not only from Democrats, but some Republicans and former US diplomats who had campaigned publicly against his candidature. Mr Bush wanted Mr Bolton in place to set in train "reform" of the world body. After all, this is the man who said of the UN that it could lose 10 of its 38 floors at its New York headquarters and it would not make any difference to its operations. The perfect candidate. Mr Bolton's temporary posting would have run out in January, and with the Republicans losing control of both houses of Congress — the House of Representatives and the Senate — in the recent midterm elections, Mr Bolton must have seen the writing on the wall. He did the only thing open to him and resigned. The less charitable view is that overweening pride goes before a fall. It is hard to imagine a more inappropriate choice to the UN than John Bolton, who was a hardline critic of the organisation. That Mr Bush believed he could impose such a hawkish ideologue onto the international community smacks of arrogance of the highest order. That Mr Bush could stand defiant after Mr Bolton's resignation is equally myopic, calling it "stubborn obstructionism (that) ill serves our country and discourages men and women of talent from serving". Mr Bolton in his brief time at the UN was instrumental in getting up Security Council resolutions condemning the nuclear ambitions of North Korea and Iran, in particular North Korea's testing of a nuclear bomb. But in a broader sense, his role at the UN was seen as the US trying to impose its world view on a body that, though united in name, is exceedingly disparate in nature. What is clear from the Bolton move is that the hawks of this US Administration who played such a prominent role in the invasion of Iraq are leaving the nest, some of their own volition, others with little choice. The most prominent recent departure, of course, was Donald Rumsfeld, who resigned in the wake of the disastrous Republican mid-term results. The losses were seen, in part, as Americans making their displeasure at the war in Iraq known to the President. Mr Bush's nominee to replace Mr Rumsfeld is Bob Gates, who was due to face the Senate this week. A shadow of doubt still lingers over Mr Gates because 20 years ago he was the CIA's deputy director during the Iran-Contra affair. This was the scheme in which money from secret weapons sales to Iran, given for the release of US hostages, was used to fund the Contra forces in Nicaragua. Mr Bush's father, George Bush snr, appointed Mr Gates as CIA director in 1991, a position he held for little more than a year. Mr Rumsfeld and Mr Bolton join other officials to have moved on, including Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and more recently, Stephen Cambone, chief intelligence official at the Pentagon. Bolton's departure has come at a time of intense pressure on Mr Bush to make progress in Iraq. Last week the President met the Iraqi Prime Minister, Nuri al-Maliki; this week he has met Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, an Iraqi Shiite leader and chief of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq; today he will receive the report of the Iraq Study Group and tomorrow British Prime Minister Tony Blair will visit the White House to discuss strategy for Iraq. The difficulty for the President is to acknowledge the group's findings and act on them without looking as if it is a turnaround in policy. That is, how to still command authority as the ground shifts under his feet. Mr Bush's nominee to replace Mr Rumsfeld is Bob Gates, who was due to face the Senate this week. A shadow of doubt still lingers over Mr Gates because 20 years ago he was the CIA's deputy director during the Iran-Contra affair. This was the scheme in which money from secret weapons sales to Iran, given for the release of US hostages, was used to fund the Contra forces in Nicaragua. Mr Bush's father, George Bush snr, appointed Mr Gates as CIA director in 1991, a position he held for little more than a year. Mr Rumsfeld and Mr Bolton join other officials to have moved on, including Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and more recently, Stephen Cambone, chief intelligence official at the Pentagon. Bolton's departure has come at a time of intense pressure on Mr Bush to make progress in Iraq. Last week the President met the Iraqi Prime Minister, Nuri al-Maliki; this week he has met Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, an Iraqi Shiite leader and chief of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq; today he will receive the report of the Iraq Study Group and tomorrow British Prime Minister Tony Blair will visit the White House to discuss strategy for Iraq. The difficulty for the President is to acknowledge the group's findings and act on them without looking as if it is a turnaround in policy. That is, how to still command authority as the ground shifts under his feet.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||