[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Page 7451]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


                       NOMINATION OF JOHN BOLTON

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise to discuss the nomination of John 
Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations. We all know, somewhat 
unexpectedly, Mr. Bolton's nomination has been held pending further 
discussion and consideration by the Foreign Relations Committee.
  I want to say I strongly support Mr. Bolton's nomination. He has been 
confirmed by the Senate four times in the past. He is a smart, 
experienced, hardworking, and talented man, and he knows the United 
Nations. He is not a career diplomat, but neither was Jean Kirkpatrick. 
He is not a career diplomat, either by profession or temperament, but 
then the role of ambassador to the U.N. has always required something 
special. A look back at some of the personalities who have held the 
job--from Adlai Stevenson to Daniel Patrick Moynihan, from Madeleine 
Albright, to Jean Kirkpatrick, to Richard Holbrooke--shows that 
directness and forcefulness are assets, not hindrances, to 
effectiveness there.
  We all know Mr. Bolton is perhaps not the world's most beloved 
manager, nor one to keep his temper entirely under wraps. Perhaps, Mr. 
President, that evokes a certain sympathy and empathy from this 
individual, although it is well known that on no occasion have I ever 
become emotionally involved in anything.
  I am sorry about a little levity here.
  Seriously, I ask my colleagues is it unique to Mr. Bolton to be 
strong in his views and opinions? If a temper and an unorthodox 
management style were disqualifiers from Government service, I would 
bet a large number of people in Washington would be out of a job.
  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 U.N. We need an ambassador who is willing to shake up 
an organization that requires serious reform. No one knows better than 
the Senator from Minnesota, who is in the chair, who has been heavily 
involved in the issues of the U.N. 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.
  I am reminded, on the judges issue and in this issue, elections do 
have consequences. I believe there are significant numbers of the 
American people who do take into consideration the consequences of a 
Presidential election, and that is the earned right of a President, 
under anything other than unusual circumstances, to pick his team. 
There were nominees of the previous Clinton administration I didn't 
agree with, I would not have selected but because President Clinton was 
elected President, I voted for his nominees on that basis.
  The U.N. is a vital organization to the world and to the national 
interests of the United States. 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 Mr. Bolton wishes to be 
dispatched for 4 years to an ineffective body, unloved by the United 
States. I do believe he wants to work actively to reform the U.N., make 
it stronger and better. Mr. Bolton, seeing clearly the U.N.'s strengths 
and its weaknesses, will be well positioned to improve the organization 
and America's relationship with him.
  As the Chair well knows, what kind of a U.N. is it that has Libya, 
Cuba, and Zimbabwe as part of its Human Rights Commission? Is it all 
right with the U.N. today? We are seeing more and more indications of 
the Oil-for-Food scandal which, again, the Senator from Minnesota, the 
Chair, has carefully examined. There is a crying need for reform.
  I am pleased the Secretary General of the U.N. has made proposals for 
reform. I support those and believe perhaps we need more. Again, it 
seems to me Mr. Bolton sees clearly the strengths and weaknesses, and 
he would be well positioned to help in this reform effort. Let's not 
forget that it desperately needs improving. It is hard to take an 
organization that has countries such as I mentioned that are members of 
the 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 one of my most 
respected Americans and beloved Americans, Brent Scowcroft, served, has 
recently issued its list of recommendations to transform the U.N. Kofi 
Annan has presented his own serious plan to implement these 
recommendations.
  In other words, I argue that right now the U.N. is in a unique 
moment, perhaps, in its history; and because of the scandals associated 
with it, it is open to reform. We need a strong personality, in my 
view, and a knowledgeable one to help bring about those reforms.
  But without hard work and pressure, nothing will happen. Over the 
years, the U.N. has proven itself to be remarkably resistant to change. 
I believe John Bolton could provide the medicine the United Nations 
needs.
  As I mentioned earlier, elections have consequences, and one 
consequence of President Bush's reelection is he actually should have 
the right to select officials of his choice. I stress this because the 
President nominates not the Democrats' selection, nor mine, nor that of 
any other Senator, but his own choice. I mentioned that when President 
Clinton was elected, I didn't share the policy views of some of the 
officials he nominated, but I voted to confirm them, knowing the 
President has a right to put into place the team he believes will serve 
him best.
  The Foreign Relations Committee is examining whether Mr. Bolton has 
engaged in truly unacceptable behavior that would disqualify him for 
office. I believe, unless we see a pattern of inappropriate conduct--
which so far I have not--I believe the Senate must move forward 
expeditiously to confirm John Bolton as America's ambassador to the 
United Nations.
  Mr. President, as I criticize some of the activities of the U.N., 
there are other activities of the U.N. going on as we speak that I 
think require America's presence. The situation in Darfur, Sudan, for 
example, is one that cries out for American participation in the 
decisionmaking process because one could draw a scenario where under 
extreme circumstances, to prevent genocide, American troops, or 
certainly American support in the form of logistics and other areas, 
could be heavily involved, as well as expenditure of American tax 
dollars, which already constitutes a significant portion of the 
financing of the United Nations.
  So I hope we can set a time and date certain for a vote on Mr. 
Bolton. As I said, if somebody has information that would disqualify 
him, that is fine. I don't think he or anybody else deserves a long, 
drawn-out, exhausting process which damages our ability to participate 
in the U.N. and also may damage the character of a good man.
  I hope we will act as expeditiously as possible. I have great respect 
for the Foreign Relations Committee and its chairman, Senator Lugar, 
all members, and the ranking member, Senator Biden. But I certainly 
hope they realize inordinate delay is not healthy. I, having had the 
opportunity of knowing Mr. Bolton for many years, believe he would do 
an outstanding job as our ambassador to the United Nations.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the 
quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________