Despite the political storm surrounding John Bolton’s nomination as ambassador to the United Nations, many in the pro-Israel community are showing their support because they consider him a great friend and defender of the Jewish state who is willing to shake things up in defense of Israel.
Bolton played a major role in getting the U.N. to repeal its odious “Zionism is Racism” resolution when he was a State Department official in the first Bush administration, and he shares Israel’s view that Iran poses an imminent nuclear threat.
Faced with losing this nomination battle, White House strategists have in recent days tried to shift the debate from Bolton’s qualifications to the urgent need to reform the U.N.
There is no question the place needs reform, and too often our diplomats show a preference for kissing butt rather than kicking it; from the president on down we’ve been assured Bolton won’t be one of them.
One of the most egregious problems is the pervasive anti-Israel machine that seems to dominate the debate at the U.N. Is Bolton, as his admirers say, the man who can change that?
His blunt, hard-charging style may be just what’s needed, but it should be directed at the State Department, not the United Nations.
The reason: Too often, U.S. officials have pandered to a corrupt, ineffective and spiteful U.N. bureaucracy, not pressured it to change.
To make changes it will be necessary to generate pressure in capitals around the world for genuine reform at the U.N. — pressure that can only start in Washington, says Richard Schifter, a retired senior diplomat and longtime Jewish leader.
Both the State Department and Congress need to mount a sustained campaign at senior levels here and in friendly foreign capitals that show we are determined to dismantle the hate-America/hate-Israel cabal that runs the U.N., Schifter said.
He knows the U.N. from the inside. He has served in six administrations, including as an assistant secretary of state for human rights, on the staff of the National Security Council, as the U.S. representative to the Geneva-based U.N. Human Rights Commission and as deputy representative in the U.N. Security Council.
Schifter has endorsed his former colleague because he thinks Bolton can help persuade the State Department to take a more aggressive approach toward U.N. reform.
Schifter and another longtime Washington figure and Jewish activist, Ambassador Max Kampelman, are organizing a group to work for changing the U.N. mindset, the American Jewish International Relations Institute (AJIRI).
Little can be accomplished by the Jewish community talking with U.N. diplomats, who are largely hostile to the United States and Israel, Schifter said. He suggests instead a two-pronged approach: working with State to develop effective strategies, and better educating members of Congress on the details so they can effectively raise the matter directly with foreign leaders they meet here and abroad.
Most members of Congress know the broad outlines of the problem but not the particulars of just how bad things really are at the United Nations and what to do about it, Schifter said. They can be valuable advocates for U.N. reform because many of the foreign leaders they meet look to Congress for help on things important to their countries. Threats to the U.N. budget don’t work because they don’t touch the people who are turning the U.N. into a cruel joke: the organization’s bureaucrats and career diplomats.
Instead, Schifter said, it is necessary to go over their heads and talk directly to foreign ministers, prime ministers and presidents.
The catalyst for that new approach can be the U.N. ambassador, and Bolton may be the kind of hard charger needed to press the State Department bureaucracy to get fully engaged.
He should focus on stirring up the State Department, urging the regional assistant secretaries (Europe, Asia, Near East, etc.) and their bosses to direct American ambassadors in countries that want to be friendly to vigorously convey the message that Washington considers U.N. reform an issue of major importance and expects its friends to pay attention.
Israel has long been a U.N. obsession. The Soviet Union and its allies in the nonaligned movement pursued anti-Israel initiatives like “Zionism is Racism” not out of any sympathy for the Palestinians but as part of a campaign to pick up support from Arab and other Muslim states for their anti-American agenda.
While hundreds of thousands of residents of Darfur have been killed and millions driven from their homes, the U.N. has failed to act. Instead, it adopted a seemingly endless stream of anti-Israel resolutions. Among the most disturbing are ones that authorize funding and resources for a worldwide anti-Israel propaganda campaign, including a full-time staffer whose job it is to agitate against Israel.
Washington consistently opposes one-sided, anti-Israel resolutions, but the Europeans usually abstain, thereby facilitating passage. Schifter is hopeful a major American-led diplomatic effort that will bring this problem to the attention of foreign leaders — bypassing their U.N. representatives — can turn this around.
A tough customer like Bolton — a seasoned diplomat who also has a clear-eyed view of the U.N.’s many deficiencies — may be what’s needed to deliver the message that the anti-Israel focus of the General Assembly undermines American efforts to bring peace to the Middle East, weakens the U.N.’s role as a member of the quartet and encourages Palestinian rejectionists.
Douglas M. Bloomfield is a Washington, D.C.-based political consultant who was formerly a legislative lobbyist for AIPAC.