United Nations credentialing committee can reject Bolton

[Ian David]

Question is, how do we encourage them to do so?

U.N. Credentials Committee Can Reject Bolton

August 3, 2005
By Mark G. Levey

The U.N. doesn't have to accept John Bolton's credentials. This may come as a rude surprise to George W. Bush, who Monday morning appointed Bolton U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, despite his rejection several weeks ago by the Senate.

The unintended consequence of Bolton's appointment, which is creating a lightning rod at the U.N. for resentment, anger and fear of Bush administration foreign policy, is a possible move by the General Assembly to limit U.S. actions in the Middle East and Persian Gulf.

It is likely that one or more General Assembly member states will challenge Bolton's credentials. In that case, under Articles 27-29, he will be seated provisionally until the nine members of the Credentials Committee can vote on the question.

The members of the Credentials Committee appointed at the 59th session are:

Benin
Bhutan
China
Ghana
Liechtenstein
Russian Federation
Trinidad and Tobago
United States
Uruguay

This could force what Bush likes to call an "up or down" vote on the issue, and likely Bolton's first direct conflict with Russia and China at the U.N. It is unclear how the smaller states on the committee might vote.

More:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/05/08/03_bolton.html

[SouthernDem2004]

1. Never happen. The UN will not get involved with internal politics.

[gratuitous]

2. You're most likely right

But wouldn't it be a hoot if a couple of the smaller nations challenged Bolton's credentials and Bushy had to sweat the committee vote anyway?

[Ian David]

6. I think of equal (perhaps greater) impact would be hundreds of thousands..

of Americans urging The United Nations to reject our country's own ambassador.

It would (as far as I know) be un-precedented.

And it would send a clear message to the rest of the world: He does not represent us!

How many hundreds of thousands of people signed anti-Bolton petitions to Congress?

What if those same people organized a drive to petition the United Nations?

Even if it's just to tell the world how America feels.

Besides, I would rather appoint Ambassador Kosh

[gratuitous]

8. Kosh?! Puh-lease!

The being we need at the UN is someone who can lose an eye without batting an, uh, eye.

[Ian David]

10. And instead we get...

[gratuitous]

11. No, we didn't even do that good

or



(The scariest thing about this post is that I found a site www.stephenfurst.com :scared:)

[Ian David]

15. No, Vir doesn't have a mean bone in his body. Bolton is angry and mean

I think we ended up with a Pak'ma'ra

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

12. So they never rejected any Ambassador's credentials?

Your post seems to imply any rejection whatsoever, for any reason, would be "involvement in internal politics." If so, why is it in their rules?

[Igel]

3. When's the last time they rejected somebody's credentials,

anyway?

The shitstorm that would follow would almost be worth it, though.

[Ian David]

4. See more of the article

U.N. MAY TAKE OPPORTUNITY TO TRY TO IMPOSE LIMITATIONS ON U.S.

While challenges are not infrequent, actual rejection of the credentials of U.N. representatives is extraordinary. In the last 30 years, the committee rejected the credentials of Burmese and Cambodian U.N. representatives because of serious doubts about the legitimacy of the regimes and factions that sent them.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/05/08/03_bolton.html

[rzemanfl]

5. I have had "serious doubts" about the legitimacy of this regime

since November of 2000.

[Igel]

7. Yikes.

I hate it when others don't bother to read more than the teaser.

Cambodia, Burma, and Portugal at the height of the anti-colonialism struggle.

Hmm ...

[LiberalFighter]

9. Those countries have probably been bribed with foreign aid by US

[GracieM]

13. They won't bite the hand that feeds them

Sad but true

[Booster]

14. If they don't accept Bolton, Bush will bomb their headquarters

in New York. Bush don't take no for an answer.