Dodd's Decision

Today's Hartford Courant contains a puff piece lauding Sen. Dodd for sacking the nomination of John Bolton to be United Nations ambassador. The Courant attempts to provide cover for Dodd's actions by explaining,

The 26-year Senate veteran nearly always goes along with presidential appointees. Dodd strongly believes that even when he disagrees with a president's choice, the chief executive has the right to have his own people, unless there's some compelling reason to object.

The Courant described Dodd's current objection as follows

Dodd said Monday that his "most fundamental reservation" about Bolton was "rewarding someone who has done serious harm in attempting to skew intelligence at the very time when our nation needs careful and accurate information and analysis. That's what Mr. Bolton did when he attempted to intimidate two U.S. intelligence analysts."

Today's Wall Street Journal contains a critical analysis of Dodd's decision, noting Ambassador Bolton's many accomplishments and explaining why his leadership is needed at this crucial time

Mr. Bolton served with exemplary tact at Turtle Bay, notwithstanding critics who said he wouldn't. More important, he has stood forcefully for American interests despite the leaks and sniping from the office of Secretary General Kofi Annan. He helped to corral votes for resolutions isolating Iran and North Korea for their nuclear programs. He was assailed for leading the fight against Mr. Annan's "reformed" Human Rights Council, but he and the U.S. are now looking prescient as that Council descends into one more Israel-bashing cabal. He also fought harder for U.N. reform than have his critics who claim to want that corrupt institution to lead the world in providing collective security.

"Realism" is back in foreign policy fashion (see the editorial on Iran), and we only wish some of that school's alleged practitioners were as realistic as Mr. Bolton. He has understood that the essence of realism is, or ought to be, to see the world as it is and speak with moral clarity about it. He offended America's enemies because he looked at their behavior and refused to excuse it. This is discomfiting to those who prefer to believe that every enemy can be appeased with talk, and that every dispute can be settled with a treaty.

It is no small diplomatic irony that, as an Undersecretary at the State Department in President Bush's first term, Mr. Bolton organized the Proliferation Security Initiative that is the one effective multilateral restraint against the spread of WMD. And it does not speak well for the American political system that it can't find a place in government at this dangerous moment in history for one of the world's leading anti-proliferation experts.

The decision by newly ascendant Democrats -- Mr. Dodd in particular -- to deny Mr. Bolton a confirmation vote on the Senate floor shows that they value partisan animosity above having a seasoned negotiator at the U.N. Mr. Bolton's graceful exit yesterday is further evidence that he deserved better, but so did American interests.

Dodd's actions will no doubt embolden our enemies and undermine the President at this, the most critical of times. While his actions are no doubt an attempt to curry favor with the far left members of his party at a time when he is seeking their approval to be President, it is we, the American people who are the losers.