|
Print this page |
| |
|
Close this window |
Washington D.C. - Senator McCain delivered the following statement today on the floor of the Senate in support of John Bolton's confirmation as United States Ambassador to the United Nations:
Mr. President, I rise to speak again in support of John Bolton's confirmation as United States Ambassador to the United Nations.
When I spoke on this floor in April in favor of Mr. Bolton, I highlighted a number of his qualities, including that he is smart, experienced, hard working, and talented, and that he knows the UN. In view of these and other impressive qualifications, the Senate has confirmed him four times in the past.
In his current job as Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, Mr. Bolton has compiled a record of accomplishment. For example, next week marks the second anniversary of the Proliferation Security Initiative, a multilateral effort to stop trafficking of weapons of mass destruction and their components. John Bolton spearheaded this program since its inception, and today more than 60 countries support it. This success alone should disprove the argument that Mr. Bolton is somehow an arch unilateralist, bent on subverting collective international action.
But PSI is not his only multilateral success. Mr. Bolton also helped to construct the G-8's Global Partnership to secure dangerous technologies and materials. He led the negotiations leading to the Treaty of Moscow, which dramatically reduced the size of deployed nuclear arsenals in the U.S. and Russia. And in his previous post as Assistant Secretary for International Organizations, he led the successful drive to repeal the UN resolution equating Zionism with racism.
Much has been made in recent weeks about Mr. Boltons personal disposition in dealing with colleagues. Let's be frank: he is not a career diplomat, either by profession or temperament, but then, the role of ambassador to the UN has always required something special. A look back at some of the personalities who have held this job - from Adlai Stevenson to Daniel Patrick Moynihan, from Jeane Kirkpatrick to Richard Holbrooke - shows that directness and forcefulness are assets, not hindrances, to effectiveness at the UN.
We all know that Mr. Bolton is perhaps not the world's most beloved manager, nor one to keep his temper entirely under wraps. But I ask my colleagues, is this unique to Mr. Bolton? If a temper and an unorthodox management style were disqualifiers from government service, I'd bet that half of Washington would be out of a job.
Mr. President, it is worth wondering not whether Mr. Bolton is a mild, genteel diplomat - we know he is not - but rather whether he is the representative we need at the United Nations. We need an ambassador who truly knows the UN. We need an ambassador who is willing to shake up an organization that requires serious reform. We need an ambassador who has the trust of the President and the Secretary of State. Mr. Bolton, it seems to me, has what it takes for the job.
The United Nations is a vital organization, to the world and to U.S. national interests. But it is not perfect by any means, and John Bolton knows this. There has been talk that the nomination of Mr. Bolton was an indication of the administration's disdain for multilateral diplomacy. I cannot believe that Mr. Bolton wishes to be dispatched for four years to an ineffective body unloved by the U.S. I do believe that he wants to work actively to reform the United Nations, to make it stronger and better. Mr. Bolton, seeing clearly the UN's strengths and its weaknesses, will be well positioned to improve the organization and America's relationship with it.
And let's not forget that it desperately needs improvement. It is hard to take entirely seriously an organization that has countries like Sudan on its Human Rights Commission, or whose General Assembly equates Zionism with racism. But at the moment a great opportunity presents itself. The panel named by the Secretary General, on which my friend Brent Scowcroft served, has recently issued its list of recommendations to transform the UN, and Kofi Annan has presented his own serious plan to implement these recommendations. But without hard work and pressure, nothing will happen -- over the years the UN has proved itself to be remarkably resistant to change. I believe that John Bolton could provide the medicine the United Nations needs.
Its clear that I am not the only one who believes this. The list of respected foreign policy experts who support Mr. Bolton's nomination is much too long to enumerate here. But let me cite just a few: Former Secretary of State James Baker has called Mr. Bolton "the right man for the job" and former Secretary Lawrence Eagleberger has written a recent op-ed praising him. Henry Kissinger, Frank Carlucci, and George Shultz, among others, have urged Mr. Bolton's quick confirmation, and a string of former ambassadors have done the same.
Mr. President, elections have consequences, and one consequence of President Bush's reelection is that he has the right to appoint officials of his choice. I stress this, because the President nominates not the Democrats' selection, nor mine or that of any other senator, but his own choice. When President Clinton was elected, I did not share the policy views of some of the officials he nominated, but I voted to confirm them, knowing that the President has a right to put into place the team that he believes will serve him best.