home

Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination

By TChris, Section Other Politics
Posted on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 06:02:29 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

A group of former diplomats, including some who served under Presidents Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Bush the First, joined to oppose the nomination of John Bolton as United Nations ambassador. Their letter to Richard Lugar, the chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, explains their position.

The former diplomats ... took issue with what they said was Bolton's view that the United Nations is valuable only when it directly serves the interest of the Unites States. They also said Bolton, currently undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, has an exceptional record of opposing efforts to enhance U.S. security through arms control and has worked for Taiwan as a paid researcher and has said Taiwan should be treated as a sovereign state. They said that "his past activities and statements indicate conclusively that he is the wrong man for this position."

The Senate committee will hold hearings on the nomination in early April.

< 87 Year OId Sentenced to 20 Years for Planned Molestation | Calls For Reform to End Police Abuse in Sealy, TX >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination | 28 comments (28 topical)
    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 06:14:05 AM EST
    Speaking only for myself, I disagree that Bolton's position that Taiwan should be treasted as a sovereign state is reason to oppose his nomination. It is reason to support it. Taiwan is a defacto independent state and should be acknowledged as such at the U.N. and elsewhere. I can't agree with the idea that the U.N. should only be supported when it directly serves our interests, but I doubt very much that such a position, if it is in fact his, would make much of a difference once he is installed. Sounds more like the typical hardliner bluster than anything else. I am glad, however, that these people are doing this. It's good to have an honest debate on these things.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#2)
    by jimcee on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 06:35:53 AM EST
    Having these former denizens of "Foggy Bottom" not wanting his nomination to go through is the best reason it should.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#3)
    by pigwiggle on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 06:43:29 AM EST
    “Taiwan is a defacto independent state and should be acknowledged as such” Exactly.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#4)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 06:56:42 AM EST
    Taiwan should be a sovereign state. I don't care for Bolton but he is right on with his view on Taiwan and the UN should do more regarding that situation.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 07:40:20 AM EST
    just curious, Are you all willing to go to war with China to defend Taiwan's sovereignty? I was buying the possible breath of fresh air in the U.N. theory until I heard this. As my position on the U.N. is the stronger it is, the better place the world is, Ixnay on Bolton.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 08:26:57 AM EST
    Like Bush he is a great guy for mexico.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 08:33:52 AM EST
    mfox, Just curious: Do you oppose defending Taiwan should China choose war as its method of seeking "reconciliation"? If so, which other allies are you willing to jettison when they need us most? As for "a breath of fresh air": It would indeed be a breath of fresh air to have at least one person at the U.N. supporting its recognition of a democratically elected government representing millions of people. Sad, but true.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#8)
    by soccerdad on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 09:02:03 AM EST
    If so, which other allies are you willing to jettison when they need us most?
    The US has a long history of jettisoning allies when it no longer serves their purpose. The US makes allies based not on principles but on current "needs".

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 10:21:10 AM EST
    If so, which other allies are you willing to jettison when they need us most? The Kurds who were encouraged by the first President Bush to rise up against Saddam Hussein, maybe? Or perhaps Lebanon in the early 1980s. It would indeed be a breath of fresh air to have at least one person at the U.N. supporting its recognition of a democratically elected government representing millions of people. Indeed, celebration of democratic governments will finally be top of the agenda, especially Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, and Russia. As will dissing certain totalitarian regimes of western Europe. But that's all beside the point! Iraqis voted in the assembly that will write the constitution which will determine their actual, permanent form of government. Which they'll get to once they actually form a government any day now. Because all the real work was already done by Republican congressmen with purple fingers. I don't necessarily think it's bad to take a tougher line with China, though criticizing its lack of democracy and long-running hostility towards its neighbor, while selling F-16s to Pakistan, might not be a completely consistent message. However, it's hard to take an authentic tough line with China when this administration is using China to fund its tax cuts, while Wal-Mart finds even more Chinese junk to sell us.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 10:32:35 AM EST
    I'm a supporter of Taiwan. We should do everything non-military to promote it's democratic ideals, such as trade sanctions on China. I'd bet that if all Americans who promote Taiwanese independence refused to buy Chinese products (or even refused to shop at Wal-mart) China would suddenly see Taiwan in a new light. China's our big buddy now too. Because of Democracy? No. Because of industrial incentives. Because we're going to have to deal with their oil consupmtion competing with ours for resources. Looking at the web of alliances that precipitated WWI, Yeah, I like Taiwan but let's find a non-hypocritical, non-self destructive position that won't endanger our military and our economy.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 10:49:28 AM EST
    We will go to war over Taiwan if we have to. Taiwan is an emerging Democracy while China is still an Authoritarian Dictatorship. That aside, China is also a growing rival and threat to American interests- Taiwan is strategicly located as well. It is in everyone's best interest for these two to either kiss and make up (which will not happen unless the Communist dictatorship falls) or agree to go their seperate ways (which will not happen unless the Communist dictatorship falls, and maybe not even then). mfox- I don't agree that a stronger UN is in the best interest of the world. The UN has repeatedly proved woefully inadequate for meeting most every political or humanitarian crisis that has come about in the past 40 or so years. It would seem it only serves as another form of legitimization for the major powers to do what they see fit, and as a valve for venting when the major powers do something that upsets the smaller nations. The UN DOES NOT have any concern beyond lip service for the spread of democracy and human rights, perhaps as a result of the number of member nations that have authoritarian regimes and rely on brutal means to stay in power. It was a useful tool for preserving the status quo during the Cold War, but now it is close to useless in its present form. Why are France and Britain still veto powers on the Security Council? Why does the Maldives get the same vote as the US in the General Assembly?

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 10:58:39 AM EST
    mds- Selling F-16s to Pakistan in no way harms our relations with China. Most of the Pakistani Air Force is retooled J-8's and other Chinese manufactured equipment. China and Pakistan are both WAY more concerned with India than each other. The only border China and Pakistan share is a few miles of desolation with a recently built Highway connecting the two nations running across it.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#13)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 11:16:15 AM EST
    Gerry, I hadn't realized the UN was responsible for spreading democracy... I don't want to go to war with China, which is why it is important to have an advocate at the UN who is in favor of Taiwanese democracy. A war with china would be long and costly, UN pressure (no matter how weak) is still pressure that is more advantageous to the US....

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#14)
    by pigwiggle on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 11:19:12 AM EST
    SD- “The US has a long history of jettisoning allies when it no longer serves their purpose. The US makes allies based not on principles but on current "needs".” Come on SD, you're more savvy than this. Allies are those with common or parallel interest; seeking synergy or favors. Altruistic national actions are the exception to foreign policy; always have been.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#15)
    by soccerdad on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 11:42:06 AM EST
    pig - you missed the context of my statement, which was actually a reply.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 12:12:49 PM EST
    Jerry - Your points are well taken and have validity. My understanding of the U.N. is that it has strayed far from it's mandate and is not very "effective" (I'm not sure what that means, though)at defining or accomplishing missions. Their non-action during Rhwandan genocide is unconscionable. As bad as they are, however, are you really ready to return to a world without a peaceful international forum, without some sort of multi-laterally sanctioned militia to intervene where human beings are being most misused? IMHO, just because it ain't workin doesn't mean it's a bad idea. It is simply subject to entropy, like all things in the universe unless proactive steps are taken. I don't see the United States unilateral action in Iraq (and Afghanistan)as acting on the will of collective nations and think that progress would have been made more quickly and many, many lives spared if deposing the Taliban and Saddam Hussein had been done by the "United" nations. Your other point is well taken, that:
    We will go to war over Taiwan if we have to. Taiwan is an emerging Democracy while China is still an Authoritarian Dictatorship. That aside, China is also a growing rival and threat to American interests- Taiwan is strategicly located as well. It is in everyone's best interest for these two to either kiss and make up (which will not happen unless the Communist dictatorship falls) or agree to go their seperate ways (which will not happen unless the Communist dictatorship falls, and maybe not even then).
    I agree with everything. However, I'm askeered of China because I'm not sure we can beat them at this game. Hubris and posturing are nice and all that, but I think it's healthy to envision the Taiwan issue as studied in the history books as "the immediate cause of America's loss of military and industrial dominance in the world". Just in case.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#17)
    by pigwiggle on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 12:24:15 PM EST
    SD- “pig - you missed the context of my statement” Right, sorry.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 12:51:28 PM EST
    Jlivingstn- "Gerry, I hadn't realized the UN was responsible for spreading democracy..." It isn't. And it doesn't. Which is part of why it is ineffective and thankfully weak. mfox- I DO think the UN has a place and is useful in at least establishing dialogue, and it does at least stabilize a lot of minor issues around the world. However, situations like the Kosovo crisis, Iraq, and the festering problem of Taiwan highlight its weakness and ineffectiveness in limiting the actions of the Five Powers (actually three powers a former empire and another former empire who hasn't realized they are not an empire anymore just yet). The UN will never be allowed to become a counter weight to the majors, because the majors will not allow it. Reform it, clean it up and make it more useful? I'm for it, as I believe Bolton is as well. China has a HUGE army, but their Navy isn't there yet(but it is growing). Unless we repudiate our commitment to Taiwan they will not jump anytime soon. They stand a lot more to lose- they rely on their trade with us a lot more than we do with them, and the ensuing blockade would be devastating. I have heard the comment more than once "If you honestly believe conflict with China is unavoidably in our future, we are better off going to war sooner rather than later", because the rate China is arming up and advancing technologically is closing the gap and erasing our advantage- I'm not there yet, I do not think they can sustain it, and I do not think the Ghosts of Tianamen are dead. Besides, China doesn't want anything to screw up their Olympics!

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 01:08:41 PM EST
    Gerry, I agree to a point. However, I'm trusting you ALOT with my future if I accept your premises that:
    1. China has a HUGE army, but their Navy isn't there yet(but it is growing). Unless we repudiate our commitment to Taiwan they will not jump anytime soon. They stand a lot more to lose- they rely on their trade with us a lot more than we do with them, and the ensuing blockade would be devastating.
    Have you noticed Gerry that there are a really really lot of Chinese people? Unless we Nuke them (and Taiwan in the process), how do we overcome this deficit (please don't say superior strategy - I'd have a nervous breakdown right now!). Are there any historical precedents to us working this out in our ultimate best interest? and, 2. I'm not there yet, I do not think they can sustain it, and I do not think the Ghosts of Tianamen are dead. Besides, China doesn't want anything to screw up their Olympics! I know some Tianamen people and truly in my heart want them to achieve democratic advancement for their country. However, I think in this case, regarding American foreign policy "It is better to stay silent and be thought [militarily weak] than to speak and remove all doubt". Verrry interesting questions indeed...

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#20)
    by soccerdad on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 01:26:20 PM EST
    pig - no problem

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 02:58:52 PM EST
    Have you noticed Gerry that there are a really really lot of Chinese people? Unless we Nuke them (and Taiwan in the process), how do we overcome this deficit (please don't say superior strategy - I'd have a nervous breakdown right now!).
    Just to remind everyone, there's a hundred miles of ocean between Taiwan and the mainland. There are not a lot of good landing beaches, and the ones that exist are heavily fortified (I've been in some of the fortifications). Without heavy bombers or capital ships, how are all of these millions of Chinese supposed to land? The Chinese are not building landing craft in anywhere close to the numbers needed to attack Taiwan. They never have. Unless you think the PLA is led by Moses or can walk on water, the invasion of Taiwan is an impossibility, and will remain so for the near and probably distant future. The biggest army in the world is no threat if it can't get at you.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#22)
    by jimcee on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 03:49:41 PM EST
    Actually strategy can win the big battle historicly speaking. I think it was the Greeks against the Persians at Thermopoly (sp?)? I believe it was 10 to 1 odds and the Persians broke and ran. I may be mistaken but it can happen although I wouldn't like the odds. I have a hard time believing the PRC would attack Tiawan because of the economic consequences of losing US markets for their trade goods and the subsequent default on the US bonds held by China. Who knows though because the Gov't there is a nasty bunch.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 04:32:05 PM EST
    Sagesource, Ever heard of people jumping out of airplanes with parachutes and landing on dry land? I don't know if that's what China has planned or not, but it's definitely an option, as the allies showed to great effect in WWII. Furthermore, as a nuclear power, China could always choose the worst possible option, but I think they are unlikely to do so since that would remove the incentive for retaking Taiwan in the first place. Nevertheless, when a country is run by a bunch of communist nutcases, you never know what they might do. Finally, with regard to their naval power: It doesn't take very long to build enough landing ships (or airplanes, see above) to land several hundred thousand men. It took the U.S. and Britain less than 3 years to build everything needed for D-Day. Don't count the Chinese out in 2008 just because they don't have the resources now (and I would suggest that the only people who are absolutely certain of the resources the Chinese have are the Chinese themselves; it's a big country and they have the advantage of a mostly controlled media on their side). None of which is to say that the Chinese will invade Taiwan, only that opposing Bolton because he supports Taiwanese sovereignty is short-sighted and plain out stupid.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 05:44:17 PM EST
    mfox writes - "I was buying the possible breath of fresh air in the U.N. theory until I heard this." Given the fact that Bolton is totally incapable of changing our position re Taiwan, I don't believe you were ever serious in your support. As for the UN, name me one thing it has done that is worthwhile in say, the last five years. justpaul - Paratroopers are used to land behind the lines as a harassment force, destroying communciations, etc. I can't think of a single instance in which a successful major battle was fought with paratroopers only. Even if you managed to get 20,000 out of the aircraft, something I just can't see happening, they are terribly vulnerable to ground fire. And remember, aircraft drop speeds and configurations basically put them in the "shooting gallery" category. And even if you got a fair number on the ground, there is a huge problem in supply and command and control. No, as long as we keep our options open, they won't do anything. If we are stupid enough to waffle, or appear weak, a bad situation could result. i.e. Desert Storm.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 29, 2005 at 07:15:14 PM EST
    mfox- Sage beat me to it, albeit a bit sarcasticly. The largest army in the world isn't worth much if it can't get to the fight. As long as can retain Naval superiority and can gain control of the air, we win. It isn't a matter of superior tactics, just superior capability. The Brits ran the largest empire in the world with one of the smallest armies of the European Powers by controlling the seas. China is nothing if not methodical and farsighted- I really think everything they are doing has a target date of 2010 in mind, give or take a couple of years- and then only if the geopolitical situation is acceptable. I still hope for a Tianamen II success-not much we can do one way or the other to encourage that.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 04:21:46 AM EST
    PPJ, Yes, I'm aware that a full scale nvasion via paratrooper is impractical. The point is that you use such tactics to put the enemy in a position where it is less able to repel a landing force, as was done at Normandy. As for drop speeds and shooting galleries: Sure. And you soften up the target with a couple hundred conventional warheads first to take out as much of ground-to-air firepower as you can. Never said it would be easy or bloodless, Jim, but when did the Chinese ever show themselves to be overly concerned about the fate of the common grunt soldier? If the Chinese ever do decide to invade Taiwan, it will most likely be attempted as a blitzkrieg style, in and win, strike to avoud the pitfalls of supply and command lines. But again, just because those problems exist doesn't mean it can't be done or wont be tried. Napoleon had about zero chance in Russia, but he tried it anyway.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 06:37:27 PM EST
    DA - I was stating that I did not believe her. Do you have problems with reading English? And yes, they did so much good. I mean, really. "Hello Mohammed? We'll be at your place next Wednesday...." Can't find anything, eh. juspaul - The air defenses of Taiwan are hardened beyond belief. Conventional missiles will do zip. But hey, inetersting thoughts.

    Re: Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 05:44:34 AM EST
    Justpaul, Jim, Gerry Owen, Jimcee, Sagesource, et. al., thank you for one of the most informative posts I have read here. Yes, America must absolutely stand by it's commitment to Taiwanese democracy, because it is the honorable thing to do.

    Former Diplomats Oppose Bolton Nomination | 28 comments (28 topical)