Posted on 05/10/2005 12:43:43 PM PDT by bigsoxfan
(CNSNews.com) - As the Senate Foreign Relations Committee prepares to vote on John Bolton's bid for U.S. ambassador to the United Nations on Thursday, the nomination is encountering resistance from an unseen source: former Secretary of State Colin Powell.
While the first-term Bush administration official has not spoken publicly about Bolton's selection, derogatory comments on the nominee from colleagues close to Powell have made their way into the mainstream media, a development some pundits say is not an accident.
The closest thing to an open discussion of Powell's opinion on the nomination came on April 22, when the New York Times reported that associates "said he had expressed reservations about Mr. Bolton in conversations with at least two wavering Republican senators."
That same day, the Washington Post ran an article about Powell's "private conversations" with senators on the Foreign Relations Committee: The Post quoted an anonymous Democratic staffer as saying Powell "has let it be known that the Bolton nomination is a bad one, to put it mildly."
Otherwise, most of the discussion has come from Lawrence Wilkerson, a retired Army colonel who served as Powell's chief of staff from 2002 to early 2005.
During an interview with the New York Times in mid-April, Wilkerson said Bolton should "absolutely not" be sent to the U.N. because he "is incapable of listening to people and taking into account their views. He would be an abysmal ambassador."
Nevertheless, the nomination got a boost from former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, who told a reporter last week that "John Bolton is eminently qualified. He's one of the smartest guys in Washington."
Asked if Bolton was a good choice, Armitage replied: "It was the president's choice, and I support my president."
However, on Tuesday -- just two days before the scheduled vote on Bolton -- the New York Times and the Washington Post ran stories based on transcripts of testimony Wilkerson gave to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee staff regarding friction between Bolton and Armitage.
According to the reports, Wilkerson made it clear that he was speaking for himself, not Powell or Armitage, when he said Bolton "had been a major cause of tension and resentment at the highest levels of the State Department because of his temperament, his treatment of subordinates and the fact that he had 'overstepped his bounds' on a number of occasions."
One example of the "tension" caused by Bolton was what Wilkerson called "his moves and gyrations" aimed at preventing Mohamed ElBaradei from being reappointed as the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations' nuclear monitoring body.
"Now, what do I mean by that?" Wilkerson said. "I mean, going out of his way to bad-mouth him, to make sure that everybody knew that the maximum power of the United States would be brought to bear against them if he were brought back in," he said of Bolton's approach to ElBaradei.
In its story, the New York Times stated that the transcripts from the Foreign Relations Committee staff interviews with Wilkerson "were provided by a Congressional Democrat opposed to Mr. Bolton's nomination." Not by accident
While acknowledging that it's impossible to know if Wilkerson is acting on Powell's behalf in this matter, David Frum, senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, noted in a post at the confirmbolton.com website that "stories like these do not (obviously) appear in newspapers by accident."
"There have been a number of these hostile stories about Bolton in the press traceable to sources close to Powell over the past 10 days," Frum told Cybercast News Service, "and Colin Powell's had plenty of opportunity to disavow them and to correct the record if he disapproves of them.
"As someone who has always demanded a lot of loyalty, one way to show loyalty would be to make clear that those who criticize his colleagues don't speak for him," Frum added.
Tom DeWeese, president of the American Policy Center, agreed that "Wilkerson is, of course, an ally of Powell's, and that's how the State Department views it all anyway."
Regarding why Powell might oppose Bolton's nomination, DeWeese said the two men approach the issue of national security "from two completely different directions. Powell wants to 'play footsie' with all the diplomats at the U.N., and Bolton wants to state the American position and carry that out.
"It's not surprising Powell would take that position," DeWeese said. "He's quite happy to be involved with the U.N. and the way it operates."
DeWeese expressed his frustration with the "games" Bolton's critics are playing over his nomination. "The issue is: Is he representing the United States or not? Bolton clearly has staked out that position, so they have to attack him on whether this diplomat or that employee liked him.
"That pretty clearly shows how weak their argument is against him and how afraid they are to really tip their hand and say they're putting international interests above American interests, and that's the real argument, as I see it," DeWeese stated.
His deputy speaking alone, shows a different side.
I had heard early on that Powell did not want to see Bolton get this appointment.
Can't imagine Powell getting into this pissing contest. Not his style.
What is going on here? I've had the utmost respect for Colin Powell. I've wondered why he left Bush's cabinet, why he was at odds with Bush. Seems he is still at odds.
His opinion will be noted and overruled. Again.
Western Union
c/o C. Powell
Silence is golden!! So, SYMU!
Colin Powell is for Colin Powell - period.
new side to colin powell I didn't know, then. I'm learning.
help me here: what's the significance of the 9/11 pics?
Lugar's fault. Bolton should have already been out of committee and confirmed.
Haven't seen those pictures in a while Dio. Thanks for posting them.
When oh when is the Foreign Relations committee going to meet again? Are they waiting for Voinovich to finish his homework?
I think it is Powell's style. He was a weak Sec of Defense and a pathetic Secretary of State. Typical guvernment EEO type of style. It was a good day when his butt was removed. Good riddance of this overblown weasel, hope he finds a lot of time to fix those old Volvos!
I read somewhere he didn't leave he was asked to leave by President Bush.
Said well.
Thanks for the information. I didn't know. Had I been freeping a while, I would have been more informed. I have alot to catch up on.
Powell was NEVER Sec of Defense!
But good point anyway. Only reason Powell is in the GOP is because the DNC is too crowded with Leftists Blacks!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.