US President George W. Bush's decision to appoint John Bolton as ambassador to the UN, while controversial, is meant to send a clear signal to the international body that it is time for reform.
Bolton, a long time critic of the UN and currently the State Department's top diplomat for weapons nonproliferation, has been outspoken in blasting the organization for being ineffective and not conducive to US interests.
"There is nobody in the [Bush] administration that takes the issue of United Nations reform more seriously than John Bolton and you can be sure he will not shy away from speaking his mind," said Brett Schaefer, a diplomatic analyst at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative Washington think tank.
Bush's selection surprised officials at the UN and in Europe at a time when he is trying to rehabilitate trans-Atlantic alliances badly damaged during his first four years in office over the Iraq War. It reinforces the perception that Bush is a unilateralist unconcerned with the views of the US' closest friends.
Bolton is known for speaking his mind and is strongly supported by Vice President Dick Cheney, who lobbied for his position in the State Department over the objections of the more moderate and then-secretary of state Colin Powell.
US conservatives, especially within Congress, have been pushing for change at the UN, and for years blocked the payment of US dues until after the Sept. 11 attacks.
Bolton has long shared their view, emphasizing in 1994 the importance of the US in leading the world, rather than the UN that can rarely agree on a single policy, leaving it incapable of acting decisively.
"There is no such thing as the UN," he said, according to the Washington Post. "There is an international community that occasionally can be led by the only real power in the world, and that is the United States, when it suits our interest and we can get others to go along."
His appointment, which must be approved by the Senate, has raised objections at home. Opposition Democrats have vowed to fight the nomination in the Senate and some Republicans have expressed reservations. Forty-three Democrats voted against his posting as undersecretary at the State Department four years ago. Six voted, however, crossed party lines and voted for him.
Democratic Senator Joseph Biden, the ranking minority leader on the chamber's Foreign Relations Committee, said he was puzzled by Bush's choice.
"In light of the president's recent efforts to reach out to allies and the international community, I'm surprised at the choice of John Bolton to be our UN representa- tive," Biden said in a statement.
Senator John Kerry, who was narrowly defeated by Bush in last year's election, struck a harsher tone, saying Bolton carries "baggage we cannot afford."
"I recognize John Bolton's long service to our country, but this is just about the most inexplicable appointment the president could make to represent the United States to the world community," Kerry said.
But conservatives argue there could be tremendous benefits for the US and UN with Bolton's presence in New York.
The recent scandal over the mismanagement of the Iraqi oil-for-food program may ease his acceptance in the diplomatic ranks.
"The price that the scandal has had on the United Nations has created a more reform-minded atmosphere in the organization and may make it more receptive to to what Bolton is trying to do," Schaefer said.
By naming Bolton, Schaefer said Bush is sending the same message to congressional conservatives as he is to the UN: that he is serious about reform. Reform advocates in Congress have been sceptical about US efforts to change the UN, and Bolton will bring a higher level of credibility when he's addressing the issue on Capitol Hill because of his long record of pushing for reform, Schaefer said.
He also said that just because Washington wants changes at the UN doesn't mean it opposes the organization or that it is unilateralist "as a first recourse."
"Conservatives want to reform the United Nations ... but not throw the baby out with the bathwater," he said.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with