protesting participation

By Goldberg at the American Prospect, a nice article on how the by-dictum UN ambassador John Bolton sucks even more than expected. In his last-minute grandstanding--to remove all references to the Millenium Development Goals from the 60th Summit document earlier this year--he makes Rice look like a UN groupie. Even the Administration (certainly Rice) seems to think the UN antagonist may be overdoing the US-supremacy routine just a bit, having set watchdogs to escort him about business and finding him undermine even Bush-endorsed UN efforts. Hence, there's a complicated answer to whether the United States "likes" the UN: its inventor, its mentor, its financier, and militia lender, the US has also "appointed" (through Bush's anomalous act of fiat) the supremely uncooperative Bolton, used military aggression in defiance of UN disapproval, stunned Kyoto negotiators, and threatened regularly to reverse aid pledges. In only one area do I see the US really amending efforts and promoting UN action: counter-terrorism. Unfortunately, when this happens in synch with undermining the rejections of traditional UN duties and reneging on (seemingly) unselfish cooperative goals, it creates a picture of crude utilitarianism that lacks utility since it so offends other members that it blocks primary US interests within the UN.

Speaking of slow negotiations--Annan's office must have been handling my schedule this week, and thus the lack of posts. I offer no apologies, but following the well-worn trail blazed by my compatriot Ambassador, will just pick up and march on to deaf ears.