John Bolton

 

"John Bolton" redirects here. For other people named "John Bolton," see John Bolton (disambiguation).

John Robert Bolton
In office August 1, 2005 – December 9, 2006
President	George W. Bush
Preceded by	John Danforth, Anne W. Patterson (acting)
Succeeded by	Alejandro Wolff (acting, Dec.2006-April 2007), Zalmay Khalilzad (May 2007 to present)
Born	November 20 1948 ( 1948--) (age 58) Baltimore, Maryland
Political party	Republican

John Robert Bolton (born November 20, 1948), is an American diplomat in several Republican administrations, who served as the Permanent US Representative to the UN from August 2005 until December 2006, on a recess appointment. He resigned in December 2006, when his recess appointment would have ended.^[1][2]

Bolton is involved with a broad assortment of conservative think tanks and policy institutes, including the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), Project for the New American Century (PNAC), Institute of East-West Dynamics, National Rifle Association, US Commission on International Religious Freedom, and the Council for National Policy (CNP).

Bolton was formerly involved with Committee for Peace and Security in the Gulf (CPSG), Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Federalist Society, National Policy Forum, National Advisory Board, Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, New Atlantic Initiative, Project on Transitional Democracies, and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

Background and education

Bolton was born in Baltimore, Maryland. The son of a fireman^[3], he grew up in the working-class neighborhood of Yale Heights and won a scholarship to the McDonogh School in Owings Mills, Maryland, graduating in 1966. He also ran the school's Students For Goldwater campaign in 1964. He then attended Yale University, where he was a member of the Yale Political Union, and where he ultimately earned a B.A. summa cum laude in 1970 and a J.D. in 1974. Though Bolton supported the Vietnam War, he enlisted in the National Guard and did not serve in Vietnam. He wrote in his Yale 25th reunion book "I confess I had no desire to die in a Southeast Asian rice paddy. I considered the war in Vietnam already lost."^[4]

Personal life

He is married to Gretchen Smith Bolton, who was born in Kansas City, Missouri, and went to high school in Scarsdale, New York. She has degrees from Wellesley College and New York University. The couple's home is currently in Bethesda, Maryland. They have one daughter, Jennifer Sarah Bolton, who graduated from the Holton-Arms School and currently attends Yale University in the same residential college as her father did, Calhoun College. She is the former Chairman of the Tory Party of the Yale Political Union (information verified by the family). A little known fact is that Bolton was the model for the "Diplomat" unit in Risk 2210 AD.

Legal career

From 1974 to 1981, Bolton was an associate at the Washington office of Covington & Burling (he returned to the firm again from 1983 to 1985). Bolton was also a partner in the law firm of Lerner, Reed, Bolton & McManus, from 1993-1999.^[5][6]

Public policy career

Between 1997 and 2000, Bolton served pro bono as an assistant to James Baker in Baker's capacity as Kofi Annan's personal envoy to the Western Sahara.^[7] Before joining the George W. Bush administration, Bolton was Senior Vice President for Public Policy Research at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank.

During the Reagan and George H. W. Bush administrations, he served in several positions within the State Department, the Justice Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

His Justice Department position required him to advance Reagan administration positions, including opposition to financial reparations to Japanese-Americans held in World War II era internment camps; the insistence of executive privilege by President Reagan during William Rehnquist's chief justice confirmation hearings, when Congress asked for memos written by Rehnquist as a Nixon Justice Department official; the framing of a bill to control illegal immigration as an essential drug war measure; and, issues related to the investigation of the Iran-Contra affair.

Bolton's government service included such positions as:

• Assistant Secretary for International Organization Affairs at the Department of State (1989–1993), where he led in the successful effort to rescind the UN resolution from the 1970s that had equated Zionism with Racism, and also played a major role in obtaining UN resolutions endorsing the use of force to fight Iraq's invasion of Kuwait;
• Assistant Attorney General, Department of Justice (1985–1989);
• Assistant Administrator for Program and Policy Coordination, USAID (1982–1983); and
• General Counsel, USAID (1981–1982).^[5][6]

Bolton is also the former executive director of the Committee on Resolutions in the Republican National Committee.^[5]

Under the administration of George W. Bush, Bolton has been the Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security (since May 11, 2001) and, since August 1, 2005, U.S. Ambassador to the UN (He was nominated on March 7, 2005).

Bolton has been a prominent participant in some neoconservative groups such as the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), and the Committee for Peace and Security in the Gulf (CPSG). But Bolton disputes the label "neo-conservative," pointing out that he was a conservative since high school, when he worked on the 1964 Goldwater campaign.

Undersecretary of State for Arms Control

John Bolton
Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security
In office 2001 – 2005
Preceded by	new position
Succeeded by	Robert Joseph
Born	November 20 1948 (1948--) (age 58) Baltimore, Maryland

Bolton served as the Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, sworn in to this position on May 11, 2001. In this role, a key area of his responsibility was the prevention of proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Bolton also led the Bush administration's opposition on constitutional grounds^[8] to the International Criminal Court, negotiating with many countries to sign agreements, called Article 98 agreements, with the U.S. to exempt Americans from prosecution by the Court, which is not recognized by the U.S.; more than 100 countries have signed such agreements so far. Bolton said the decision to pull out of the ICC was the "happiest moment" of his political career so far.^[9]

Weapons of mass destruction

Bolton was instrumental in derailing a 2001 bio-weapons conference in Geneva convened to endorse a UN proposal to enforce the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention. "U.S. officials, led by Bolton, argued that the plan would have put U.S. national security at risk by allowing spot inspections of suspected U.S. weapons sites, despite the fact that the U.S. claims not to have carried out any research for offensive purposes since 1969."^[10]

Also in 2002, Bolton is said to have flown to Europe to demand the resignation of Jose Bustani, head of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), and to have orchestrated his removal at a special session of the organization.^{[citation needed]} The United Nations' highest administrative tribunal later condemned the action as an "unacceptable violation" of principles protecting international civil servants. Bustani had been unanimously re-elected for a four-year term—with strong U.S. support—in May 2000, and in 2001 was praised for his leadership by Colin Powell.^[11]

He also pushed for reduced funding for the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction program to halt the proliferation of nuclear materials.^[12] At the same time, he was involved in the implementation of the Proliferation Security Initiative, working with a number of countries to intercept the trafficking in weapons of mass destruction and in materials for use in building nuclear weapons. Following one such interception at sea, Libya made an agreement with the U.K. and the U.S. to dismantle its nuclear weapons industry.

Diplomacy

According to an article in the The New Republic, he was highly successful in pushing his agenda, but his bluntness has won him many enemies. "Iran's Foreign Ministry has called Bolton 'rude' and 'undiplomatic'".^[13] In response to critics, Bolton states that his record "demonstrates clear support for effective multilateral diplomacy." Bush administration officials have stated that his past statements would allow him to negotiate from a powerful position. "It's like the Palestinians having to negotiate with [Israeli Prime Minister] Ariel Sharon. If you have a deal, you know you have a deal," an anonymous official told CNN.^[14] He also "won widespread praise for his work establishing the Proliferation Security Initiative,^[15] a voluntary agreement supported by 60 countries".^[16]

He was part of the State Department's delegation to six-party talks on the North Korean nuclear program in 2003. He was removed from the delegation after describing Kim Jong-il as a "tyrannical dictator" of a country where for many, "life is a hellish nightmare."^[17] In response, a North Korean spokesman said "such human scum and bloodsucker is not entitled to take part in the talks."^[18] American Democrats argued that Bolton's words at the time were undiplomatic and endangered the talks. Critics argue that Bolton's record of allegedly politicizing intelligence will harm U.S. credibility with the United Nations^[19] which has many current problems.^[20][21] President Bush wants the organization reformed and said he wants John Bolton because he "can get the job done at the United Nations."^[22]

Criticism

Critics allege Bolton tried to spin intelligence to support his views and political objectives on a number of occasions. Greg Thielmann, of the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), was assigned as the daily intelligence liaison to Bolton. Thielmann stated to Seymour Hersh that, "Bolton seemed troubled because INR was not telling him what he wanted to hear ... I was intercepted at the door of his office and told, 'The Undersecretary doesn't need you to attend this meeting anymore.'" According to former coworkers, Bolton withheld information that ran counter to his goals from Secretary of State Colin Powell on multiple occasions, and from Powell's successor Condoleezza Rice on at least one occasion.^[23]

In 2002, Bolton accused Cuba of transfers of biological weapons technology to rogue states and called on it "to fully comply with all of its obligations under the Biological Weapons Convention."^[24] According to a Scripps Howard News Service article, Bolton "wanted to say that Cuba had a biological weapons capacity and that it was exporting it to other nations. The intelligence analysts seemed to want to limit the assessment to a declaration that Cuba 'could' develop such weapons."^[25] Bolton attempted to have the chief bioweapons analyst in the State Department's bureau of intelligence and research and the CIA's national intelligence officer for Latin America reassigned. Under oath at his Senate hearings for confirmation as Ambassador, he denied trying to have the men fired, but seven intelligence officials contradicted him.^[12] Ultimately, "intelligence officials refused to allow Bolton to make the harsh criticism of Cuba he sought to deliver,"^[25] and were able to keep their positions. Bolton claims that the issue was procedural rather than related to the content of his speech and that the officers, who did not work under him, behaved unprofessionally.

Bolton is alleged by Democratic Congressman Henry Waxman to have played a role in encouraging the inclusion of statement that British Intelligence had determined Iraq attempted to procure yellowcake uranium from Niger in President Bush's 2003 State of the Union Address.^[26] These statements were claimed by critics of the President to be partly based on documents later found to be forged.^[27] Waxman's allegations have no visible means of support as they are based on classified documents.^[26]

Bolton is alleged by the Knight Ridder news agency to have been scheduled to tell the House of Representatives International Relations subcommittee that Syria's development of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons had progressed to such a point that they posed a threat to stability in the region. Knight Ridder reported that Bolton’s appearance was cancelled after CIA and other intelligence agencies said that assessment was exaggerated.^[28]

Bolton stated in June 2004 congressional testimony Iran was lying about enriched uranium contamination: "Another unmistakable indicator of Iran's intentions is the pattern of repeatedly lying to ... the IAEA, ... when evidence of uranium enriched to 36 percent was found, it attributed this to contamination from imported centrifuge parts." However later isotope analysis supported Iran’s explanation of foreign contamination for most of the observed enriched uranium.^[29] At their August 2005 meeting the IAEA's Board of Governors concluded: "Based on the information currently available to the Agency, the results of that analysis tend, on balance, to support Iran’s statement about the foreign origin of most of the observed HEU contamination."^[30].

Permanent Representative to the UN

On March 7, 2005 Bolton was nominated to the post of U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations by President George W. Bush. As a result of a Democratic filibuster, he was never confirmed by the Senate and thus never obtained the official title of Ambassador. However, Bolton's nomination received strong support from Republicans but faced heavy opposition from Democrats due initially to concerns about his strongly expressed views on the United Nations,^[31] and, later, alleged actions while at the State Department.^[32]

Holding a 10-8 majority in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (tasked with vetting ambassadorial nominees), the Republican leadership hoped to send Mr. Bolton's nomination to the full Senate with a positive recommendation. Concern among some Republicans on the committee, however, prompted the leadership not to risk losing such a motion and instead to send the nomination forward with no recommendation. In the full Senate, Republican support for the nomination remained uncertain, with the most vocal Republican critic, Ohio Senator George V. Voinovich, circulating a letter urging his Republican colleagues to oppose the nomination.^[33] Democrats insisted that a vote on the nomination was premature, given the resistance of the White House to share classified documents related to Bolton's alleged actions. The Republican leadership moved on two occasions to end debate, but because a supermajority of 60 votes is needed to end debate, the leadership was unable to muster the required votes with only a 55-44 majority in the body. An earlier agreement between moderates in both parties to prevent filibustering of nominees was interpreted by the Democrats to relate only to judicial nominees,^[34] not ambassadorships, although the leader of the effort, Sen. John McCain, said the spirit of the agreement was to include all nominees.

On November 9, 2006, President George W. Bush, only days after losing both houses to a Democratic majority, sent the nomination^[35] for John Robert Bolton to continue as representative for the United States at the UN.^[36] He said: "I believe that the leaders of both political parties must try to work through our differences. And I believe we will be able to work through differences. I reassured the House and Senate leaders that I intend to work with the new Congress in a bipartisan way to address issues confronting this country."

Views on the United Nations

Bolton has been a strong critic of the United Nations for much of his career. In a 1994 Global Structures Convocation hosted by the World Federalist Association (now Citizens for Global Solutions), he stated,

“

There is no such thing as the United Nations. There is only the international community, which can only be led by the only remaining superpower, which is the United States."[37] He also stated that "The Secretariat building in New York has 38 stories. If you lost ten stories today, it wouldn't make a bit of difference."[38]

”

Both Bolton's opponents^[39] and his supporters^[40] have used the same video of his remarks at the 1994 event in support of their points of view.

When pressed on the statement during the confirmation process, he responded, "There's not a bureaucracy in the world that couldn't be made leaner."^[41] In a paper on U.S. participation in the UN, John Bolton stated "the United Nations can be a useful instrument in the conduct of American foreign policy."^[42]

A member of the Project for the New American Century, Bolton was also one of the signers of the January 26, 1998 PNAC letter sent to President Clinton urging him to remove Saddam Hussein from power using U.S. diplomatic, political and military power.^[43] The letter also stated "American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council."^[44]

The Nov. 15, 2005 Washington Times article Can the U.S. find a substitute for the U.N.? noted that Bolton advocates "a revolution of reform" at the UN. Specifically, he called for:

• The five permanent members of the UN Security Council to work more closely to craft powerful resolutions and make sure they are enforced, and to address the underlying causes of conflicts, rather than turning them over to the Secretariat and special envoys;
• A focus on administrative skills in choosing the next secretary-general; and
• A more credible and responsible Human Rights Commission.

Bolton warned that the U.S. had the option of relying on regional or other international organizations to advance its goals if the U.N. proves inadequate.^[45]

2005 nomination, Senate confirmation hearings

Day 1

On April 11, 2005, The Senate Foreign Relations Committee reviewed Bolton's qualifications. Bolton said that he and his colleagues "view the U.N. as an important component of our diplomacy" and will work to solve its problems and enhance its strengths.

Republican committee chairman Richard Lugar of Indiana criticized Bolton for ignoring the "policy consequences" of his statements, saying diplomatic speech "should never be undertaken simply to score international debating points to appeal to segments of the U.S. public opinion or to validate a personal point of view."^[46] The committee's top Democrat, Joe Biden of Delaware, compared sending Bolton to the UN to sending a "bull into a china shop," and expressed "grave concern" about Bolton's "diplomatic temperament" and his record: "In my judgment," Biden said, "your judgment about how to deal with the emerging threats have not been particularly useful."

Republican George Allen of Virginia said that Bolton had the "experience," "knowledge," "background," "and the right principles to come into the United Nations at this time," calling him "the absolute perfect person for the job."

Russ Feingold, a Democrat on the committee from Wisconsin, asked Bolton about what he would have done had the Rwandan genocide occurred while he was ambassador to the United Nations, and criticized his answer – which focused on logistics – as "amazingly passive."

According to Newsday, Lincoln Chafee, a Republican from Rhode Island, "may be pivotal for Bolton's nomination."^[47] His initial remarks were cautiously favorable: "You said all the right things in your opening statement," he said. Chafee stated that he would probably support Bolton "unless something surprising shows up."

According to an Associated Press story on the hearing, "[T]hree protesters briefly interrupted the proceedings, standing up in succession with pink T-shirts and banners, one reading: 'Diplomat for hire. No bully please.'" These protesters were part of a group advocating representation in the Senate for residents of the District of Columbia that is known for such demonstrations at a variety of hearings.

On the whole, Bolton "displayed not the slightest bit of energy, one way or the other, when discussing the challenges facing international organizations," according to Fred Kaplan of Slate Magazine.^[19]

Day 2

On April 12, 2005, the Senate panel focused on allegations discussed above that Bolton pressured intelligence analysts. "I've never seen anybody quite like Secretary Bolton. ... I don't have a second, third or fourth in terms of the way that he abuses his power and authority with little people," former State Department intelligence chief Carl W. Ford Jr., said, calling Bolton a "serial abuser." Ford contradicted Bolton's earlier testimony, saying: "I had been asked for the first time to fire an intelligence analyst for what he had said and done."

Lugar, who criticized Bolton at his April 11 hearing, said that the "paramount issue" was supporting the president's nominee. He conceded that "[b]luntness may be required," even though it is not "very good diplomacy."

Chafee, the key member for Bolton's approval, said that "the bar is very high" for rejecting the president's nominees, suggesting that Bolton would make it to the Senate.

Erosion of Republican support

On April 19, Democrats, with the unexpected support of Senator George V. Voinovich, Republican of Ohio, forced Senator Lugar to delay the committee vote on Mr. Bolton's nomination until May. The debate concerning his nomination raged in the Senate prior to the Memorial Day recess. Two other Republicans on the Foreign Relations Committee, Senators Lincoln Chafee and Chuck Hagel, also expressed serious concerns about the Bolton nomination.

Asked on April 20 if he was now less inclined to support the nomination, Mr. Chafee said, "That would be accurate." He further elaborated that Mr. Bolton's prospects were "hard to predict" but said he expected that "the administration is really going to put some pressure on Senator Voinovich. Then it comes to the rest of us that have had some reservations."

On April 20, it emerged that Melody Townsel, a former US AID contractor, had reported to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that Bolton had used inflammatory language and thrown objects in the course of her work activities in Moscow. Townsel's encounter with Bolton occurred when she served as a whistleblower against a poorly performing minority contractor for US AID, IBTCI. Townsel told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee staff that Bolton had made derogatory remarks about her sexual orientation and weight, among other workplace improprieties. In an official interview with Senate Foreign Relation Committee staff, Townsel detailed her accusations against Bolton, which were confirmed by Canadian designer Uno Ramat, who had served as an IBTCI employee and one of Townsel's AID colleagues. Time Magazine, among other publications, verified Townsel's accusations and Ramat's supporting testimony, and Townsel's story was transcribed and entered into the official Senate committee record. Townsel, who was an employee of Young & Rubicam at the time of her encounter with Bolton, continued working for the company on a variety of other US AID projects.

On April 22 the New York Times and other media alleged that Bolton's former boss, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, was personally opposed to the nomination and had been in personal contact with Republican Senators Chafee and Hagel. This development was interpreted as a further rift between Powell and the Bush Administration. Reuters reported, also on April 22, that a spokesman for Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said that the Senator felt the committee "did the right thing delaying the vote on Bolton in light of the recent information presented to the committee."^[48]

On 28 April The Guardian reported that Powell was "conducting a campaign" against Bolton because of the acrimonious battles they had had while working together, which among other things had resulted in Powell cutting Bolton out of talks with Iran and Libya after complaints about Bolton's involvement from the British. It added that "The foreign relations committee has discovered that Bolton made a highly unusual request and gained access to 10 intercepts by the National Security Agency... Staff members on the committee believe that Bolton was probably spying on Powell, his senior advisers and other officials reporting to him on diplomatic initiatives that Bolton opposed."^[49] However, Rich Lowry pointed out that "During the same four-year period, other State Department officials made roughly 400 similar requests."^[50]

Also on May 11 Newsweek reported allegations that the American position at the 7th Review Conference in May 2005^[51] of the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty had been undercut by Bolton's "absence without leave" during the nomination fight, quoting anonymous sources "close to the negotiations".^[52]

The Democrats' filibuster

On Thursday, May 26, 2005, the Senate Democrats postponed the vote on John Bolton's UN nomination. The Republican leadership failed to gain enough Republican or Democratic support to pass a cloture motion on the floor debate over Bolton, and minority leader Harry Reid conceded the move signaled the "first filibuster of the year." The Democrats claimed that key documents regarding Bolton and his career at the Department of State were being withheld by the Bush administration. Scott McClellan, White House press secretary, responded by saying, "Just 72 hours after all the good will and bipartisanship (over a deal on judicial nominees), it's disappointing to see the Democratic leadership resort back to such a partisan approach."^[53]

The failure of the Senate to end debate on Bolton's nomination provided one surprise for some: Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) voted against cloture for procedural reasons, so that he could bring up a cloture vote in the future.^[54] (Although Senator George Voinovich (R-OH) once spoke against confirming Bolton, he voted for cloture.) Senator John Thune (R-SD) voted to end debate but announced that he would vote against Bolton in the up-or-down vote as a protest against the government's plans to close a military base (Ellsworth) in his state of South Dakota.

On June 20, 2005 the Senate voted again on cloture. The vote failed 54-38, six votes short of ending debate. That marked an increase of two "no" votes, including the defection of Republican Voinovich, who switched his previous "yes" vote and urged President Bush to pick another nominee (Democrats Mark Pryor, Mary Landrieu and Ben Nelson voted to end debate both times). On June 21, Frist expressed his view that attempting another vote would be pointless, but later that day, following a lunch at the White House, changed his position, saying that he would continue to push for an up-or-down vote.^[55] Voinovich later recanted his opposition and stated that if Bolton were renominated he would have supported the nomination.^[56]

Accusations of false statement

On July 28, 2005 it was revealed that a statement made by Bolton on forms submitted to the Senate was false. Bolton indicated that in the prior five years he had not been questioned in any investigation, but in fact he had been interviewed by the State Department Inspector General on July 18, 2003 as part of an investigation into the sources of pre-war claims of weapons of mass destruction evidence in Iraq. After insisting for weeks that Bolton had testified truthfully on the form, the State Department reversed itself, stating that Bolton had simply forgotten about the investigation.^{[citation needed]}

Recess appointment

On August 1, 2005, President Bush officially made a recess appointment of Bolton, installing him as Permanent US Representative to the UN. A recess appointment lasts until the adjournment of the sitting Congress or until the individual is renominated and confirmed by the Senate. During the announcement, Bush said, "This post is too important to leave vacant any longer, especially during a war and a vital debate about U.N. reform." Democrats criticized the appointment, and Republican Sen. George Voinovich, whose opposition originally stalled a vote on the nominee, said Bolton would lack credibility in the U.N. because he lacked Senate confirmation.^{[citation needed]} Voinovich later complimented Bolton on his work at the UN and supported confirmation when he was renominated in 2006. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said, "We look forward to working with him as I do with the other 190 ambassadors and we will welcome him at a time when we are in the midst of major reform. I think it is the president's prerogative, and the president has decided to appoint him through this process."

Term at the UN

The Economist called Bolton "the most controversial Ambassador ever sent by America to the United Nations." Some colleagues in the UN appreciated the goals Bolton was trying to achieve, but not his abrasive style.^[57][58] The New York Times, in its editorial The Shame of the United Nations, praised Bolton's stance on "reforming the disgraceful United Nations Human Rights Commission",^[59] saying "John Bolton, is right; Secretary-General Kofi Annan is wrong." The Times also said that the commission at that time was composed of "some of the world's most abusive regimes" who used their membership as cover to continue their abusiveness.

Bolton also opposed the proposed replacement for the Human Right Commission, the UN Human Rights Council, as not going far enough for reform, saying: “We want a butterfly. We don't intend to put lipstick on a caterpillar and call it a success.”^[60]

2006 nomination

President Bush announced his intention to renominate Bolton for confirmation as U.N. ambassador at the beginning of 2006, and a new confirmation hearing was held on July 27,2006, in the hope of completing the process before the expiration of Bolton's recess appointment at the end of the 109th Congress.^[61] Senator George Voinovich, who had previously stood in opposition to Bolton, had amended his views and determined that John Bolton was doing a "good job" as UN Ambassador; in February 2006, he said "I spend a lot of time with John on the phone. I think he is really working very constructively to move forward."^[62]

Over the summer and during the fall election campaign, no action was taken on the nomination because Senator Lincoln Chafee, Republican from Rhode Island, who was in a difficult re-election campaign, blocked a Senate Foreign Relations Committee vote. Without his concurrence, the SFRC would be deadlocked 9-9, and the nomination could not go to the Senate floor for a full vote. President Bush formally resubmitted the nomination on November 9, 2006, immediately following a midterm election that would give control of the 110th Congress to the Democratic party.^[63] Senator Chafee, who had just lost his re-election bid, issued a statement saying he would vote against recommending Bolton for a Senate vote, citing what he considered to be a mandate from the recent election results: "On Tuesday, the American people sent a clear message of dissatisfaction with the foreign policy approach of the Bush administration. To confirm Mr. Bolton to the position of U.N. ambassador would fly in the face of the clear consensus of the country that a new direction is called for."^[64]

On December 4, 2006, Bolton announced that he would terminate his work as U.S. Representative to the UN at the end of the recess appointment and would not continue to seek confirmation.^[65] His letter of resignation from the Bush administration was accepted on December 4, 2006, effective when his recess appointment ended December 9 at the formal adjournment of the 109th Congress.

The announcement was characterized as Bolton's "resignation" by the Associated Press,^[66] United Press International,^[67] ABC News,^[68] and other news sources, as well as a White House press release^[69] and President Bush himself.^[70] The White House, however, later objected to the use of this language. Deputy Press Secretary Dana Perino told CBS News "it is not a resignation."^[71] The actual language of the President's written acceptance was: "It is with deep regret that I accept John Bolton’s decision to end his service in the Administration as Permanent Representative of the United States to the United Nations when his commission expires." However, at press conference, the president said, "I received the resignation of Ambassador John Bolton. I accept it. I'm not happy about it. I think he deserved to be confirmed."^[72] Some news organizations subsequently altered their language to phrases such as "to step down," "to leave," or "to exit."

Support for Bolton

On Dec. 4, 2006, quotations praising Bolton's work at the UN from supporters of a cross-section of political persuasions and from a variety of different publications were published on the Heritage Foundation website. During his confirmation hearings in 2005, letters with signatures of more than 100 co-workers and professional colleagues were sent to Senator Lugar, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, in praise of Bolton and contradicting other criticisms and allegations concerning his diplomatic style and his treatment of colleagues and staff. In the fall of 2006, when his nomination was again before the Committee, another letter signed by more than 56 professional colleagues supporting the renomination was sent to Senator Lugar.^[73] A Wall Street Journal op ed by Claudia Rossett on Dec. 5, 2006, said in part, "Bolton has been valiant in his efforts to clean up UN corruption and malfeasance, and follow UN procedure in dealing with such threats as a nuclear North Korea, a Hezbollah bid to take over Lebanon, and the nuclearization of Hezbollah's terror-masters in Iran. But it has been like watching one man trying to move a tsunami of mud."^[74]

Nobel Peace Prize nomination

Bolton was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize along with Ken Timmerman on February 7, 2006 by Sweden's former deputy prime minister and Liberal party leader Per Ahlmark "for their repeated warnings and documentation of Iran's secret nuclear buildup and revealing Iran's 'repeated lying' and false reports to the International Atomic Energy Agency."^{[75][76][77][78]}

American Enterprise Institute

In Bolton's time at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, he has spoken against the policy of rewarding North Korea for ending its nuclear weapons program.^[79] He said the policy would encourage others to violate nuclear non-proliferation rules so that they could then be rewarded for following the rules they'd already agreed to.^[79]

References