Diplomacy still isn’t John Bolton’s strong point

October 11, 2005

A top United Nations envoy returned from the Darfur region of Sudan recently and had discouraging news: the calamity is actually getting worse.

“I found the situation much more dangerous and worrisome than I expected it to be,” said [Juan Mendez, special adviser to U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan], who just completed his second visit to the region in the past year. “Until last week, there have never been concerted, massive attacks of an indiscriminate nature against civilians” in camps in Darfur.

Mendez was prepared to share his findings with representatives on the U.N. Security Council, but was denied the opportunity — by Bush’s man at the U.N., John Bolton.

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton blocked a U.N. envoy on Monday from briefing the Security Council on grave human rights violations in Sudan’s Darfur region, saying the council had to act against atrocities and not just talk about them.

Bolton, joined by China, Algeria and Russia, prevented Juan Mendez, Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s special adviser for the prevention of genocide, from briefing the council on his recent visit to Darfur, despite pleas from Annan and 11 other council members that Mendez be heard.

According to a Washington Post report, Bolton said the Security Council didn’t need another briefing and said a report from Mendez “would distract the 15-nation council from making decisions needed to halt the violence.”

Leave it to John Bolton to argue that a U.N. envoy for the prevention of genocide, offering updated, first-hand information, might “distract” the Security Council.

Two months on the job and Bolton is already learning how to make friends and influence people — and doing the opposite.

You see, there’s a broader purpose to Bolton’s behavior. It’s called “Thug Diplomacy.” It’s the brainchild of a cabal of neocons that pine to be viewed as more than putzy little pin-heads. They got one too many wedgies growing up and they’re out to get back at the world by destroying it.

Speaking of pinheads…the Muse has a message for the one in the Oval Office: You can’t call it terror if you’re not afraid of it.

  • So his position is that a briefing on the facts would interfere with the ability to make decisions? Sounds like something the administration that gave him his job might say. What does empiricism have to do with the execution of preconceived policy goals, anyway?

  • AHHH but Bolton wasn’t hired to be a diplomat.

    His excuse for the block is so pathetic. This administration doesn’t want to do anything about Darfur because the Sudanese government is supposedly (stress supposedly) helping with the GWOT.

  • On the other hand, they had “just concluded a briefing on Darfur from Hedi Annabi, the assistant secretary-general for peacekeeping operations”, so it is hard to make the argument that they are ignoring the situation.

    Criticism of Bolton should focus on the fact that he is demanding proposals for action while offering none of his own. This from a man who represents the one countryin the world most inclined to engage in unilateral peace-keeping missions . He’s a rough and tough kibitzer, that Bolton.

  • In defense of Bolton, the UN really does not need any more briefings about how bad Darfur has become. At this point, briefings are little more than an attempt by the UN to seem engaged.

    The UN has failed the people of Darfur and no amount of briefings is going to change that.

    So Bolton’s calls for less talk and more action ought to be welcomed.

    On the other hand, his decision to side with China, Algeria and Russia on this issue does not give one a lot of confidence that he takes seriously his own call for more action. China and Russia have been the two hold-outs who have prevented any sort of UN-led action on Darfur, so why Bolton would side with them to block a briefing while calling for more action is incomprehensible since China and Russia only helped block the briefing in order to prevent action from being taken.

  • I agree with Eugene and GP. While Boltan is no model dipolmat, he is at the very least trying to push past the lack of action on this issue. I’m dismayed that he offered nothing of his own for the “action” he demanded, but no one needs anymore evidence of genocide in Sudan. Its happening.

    • Comments are closed.