|
Return to Transcripts main page
DIPLOMATIC LICENSE
Current Events at the United Nations
Aired March 11, 2005 - 21:00:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN BOLTON, U.S. AMB. NOMINEE TO THE U.N.: As you know I have over the years written critically about the United Nations.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The policies are made in the capital by the big boss, so I hope that he will follow the line.
KOFI ANNAN, U.N. SECY.-GEN.: There is not going to be any blood on the floor. There will be changes which will be done in a civilized way.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RICHARD ROTH, CNN ANCHOR: Like a bolt out of the blue, American arms control negotiator John Bolton was nominated this week as the next U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. Yes, there may still be a confirmation fight in the U.S. Congress, but it appears Bolton is headed right at the United Nations.
One U.S. official has already described Bolton as a guided missile.
Welcome to DIPLOMATIC LICENSE. I'm Richard Roth.
Bolton is an undiplomatic diplomat. His new boss, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, described Bolton as a tough-minded diplomat with a track record of getting things done. One of the institutions he has been toughest on, the United Nations. He looked ahead last Monday.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BOLTON: This is a time of opportunity for the United Nations, which likewise requires American leadership to achieve successful reform.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROTH: But will Bolton sell at the United Nations? Critics point to his U.N.-bashing, like the time he said you could lose 10 stories off the top of the U.N. building and no one would notice the difference. And then there was the time he said that there was no such thing as the United Nations.
Bolton has said the proudest day of his diplomatic career was when he withdrew the signature of the United States from the International Criminal Court.
On DIPLOMATIC LICENSE seven years ago, Bolton rendered harsh judgment of the court.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BOLTON: Winston Churchill once said that the free nations of the world should have responded to the Russian revolution by strangling Bolshevism at it's cradle. I have much the same attitude about this court. I think we should stop it right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROTH: Bolton has demanded a hard line on North Korea and Iran over nukes and last September scoffed at nervousness over bringing the issue to the Security Council in New York.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BOLTON: We're talking about discussions in the Security Council Chamber, not the Starr Chamber. We don't have whips and chains around the side of it. We don't have permanent representatives stretched out on racks. We don't have thumb screws for foreign ministers. We're talking about the Security Council.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROTH: Some critics may be using those devices on themselves this week judging by reaction in some circles.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LAWRENCE KORB, FMR. U.S. ASST. SECY. OF DEFENSE: If John Bolton takes the same attitude to the UN that he has displayed all throughout his 20 years of his public service, it will do damage to the United Nations.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROTH: One Security Council diplomat told me People are alarmed at the United Nations. Publicly no one wants to step in front of a locomotive at this point, so the welcome mat is out.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
YAHTA MAHMASSANI, ARAB LEAGUE AMB. TO U.N.: Once you are in the United Nation you have to go play by the rules of the United Nations and I'm sure that Ambassador-designee Bolton, once he comes to the United Nations, he will full understanding of the environment.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROTH: Well, it seems the United States could only name ambassadors named John at the UN. We had Negroponte, then Danforth, and now Bolton.
One upset writer said "The fox was in the henhouse," but maybe that's a good thing.
To argue -- and I do want an argument -- we welcome from CNN's Washington bureau Phyllis Bennis, a fellow at the Institute for Public Studies. She is a writer, a lecturer, and a lot of other things; and Michael Waller is also with us. Professor of international communications at the Institute of World Politics. And I just belong in an institute.
Phyllis Bennis, what is so bad about John Bolton? Doesn't the U.N. need some reforming with U.S. involvement?
PHYLLIS BENNIS, INST. OF POLICY STUDIES: The United Nations needs plenty of reforming. There's plenty of problems at the United Nations. The kinds of problems that John Bolton wants to solve at the United Nations are not the kinds that are going to make the United Nations stronger and better.
Luckily, most American's don't agree with John Bolton when he says that the United Nations doesn't exist and the other more extraneous things that he has said. This is really an example, once again, of the Bush administration sidelining its own realist and rewarding its own extremists.
ROTH: Michael Waller?
MICHAEL WALLER, INST. OF WORLD POLICIES: Well, there is nothing extreme about him at all.
He wants to take a tough line towards terrorist states that a lot of people find upsetting, and he wants to hold the United Nations responsible and accountable for the resolutions its passed and refuses to enforce. He wants to stop nepotism and corruption at the highest levels of the UN; and if that is extreme, then he's the guy to do it.
ROTH: Why is it a great selection, though, for a man who has such a bias on the record against the United Nations? Doesn't it make it a little difficult for him to work successfully? Or is this a situation like you got to have Sharon and Israel to make a deal and you got to have Reagan to bring the wall down?
WALLER: He's the most effective person to try to bring up constructive change at the United Nations.
Right now you can see how upset everybody is, but I think once they get to know him, once they get to know that he does realize the United Nations does have a purpose and it certainly needs to be fixed, they'll, I think, find it very productive to have him there.
He's not a patsy and he's about to be led around by the -- some people who are too nice to be U.N. ambassadors, like John Danforth, who was a great diplomat but not somebody who could try to effect any change there.
ROTH: Too nice -- Phyllis.
BENNIS: Well, I don't nice is really a word here.
As we know, this is not a diplomat. This is not somebody who should be given a diplomatic task.
On the other hand, what is true is that having somebody with his position in the United Nations may be very good for one reason. That is there will be no illusions. No one watching John Bolton running the U.S. mission to the United Nations would believe, as I think some have believed in the past, that the Reagan administration -- sorry -- that the Bush administration -- Freudian slip there -- that the Bush administration has two wings, that there are different opinions.
This will make clear the kind of unilateralist, militarist, trajectory of this administration with no possibility of illusions from anybody else.
ROTH: What should John Bolton's first mission be -- Michael Waller.
WALLER: His first mission should be to introduce himself, to say that the time is up for the United Nations not standing for its own principles and the time is up to promote freedom around the world.
ROTH: Well, what do you mean not standing for its own principles?
WALLER: Well, it should be standing for freedom, it should be standing for international cooperation, and it's not. It's a coven of nepotistic, corrupt, inept bureaucrats who are accountable to nobody. There are billions and billions of dollars worth of corruption there that were investigated only because of pressure from the "Wall Street Journal" and the Bush administration, from nobody else. And those problems are being solved now.
ROTH: Wasn't the United States sitting in the Security Council when a lot of these actions were taken, though?
WALLER: Certainly, but we don't control the bureaucracy and the bureaucracy is a great part of the problem. Another part of the problem is --
BENNIS: First of all, the bureaucracy was not the main part of the problem in the Oil For Food so-called scandal, if that's what your referring to.
But it seems to me that the first thing that John Bolton might want to do at the United Nations is to say that if the United Nations is sending a special envoy to Syria, to say occupation has to end now and if it doesn't your going to be isolated. He should go there encouraging the United Nations to do the exact same thing for Israel, to go to Israel, meet with General Sharon, and say if Israel does not end its occupation of Palestine that it is going to be isolated and pay a price, and then go to Washington and say the same thing to George Bush and say if the United States does not end its occupation of Iraq, that it's going to be isolated and it will pay a price.
ROTH: Is John Bolton going to say that -- Michael.
WALLER: That's kind of a silly thing for him to say, that the United States should end the occupation of Iraq when its already our policy to end the occupation as soon as we can and the Iraqi people and the people who the Iraqis elected don't want us to leave right now. They want us to be a stabilizing presence there until they can get their country back, and I think that no one is going to be happier than we are to pull out of Iraq, but not until we finish the job.
BENNIS: 58 percent of Iraqis say they want the United States to pull out now. Another 20 or so percent say they want it to pull out within six months. That doesn't sound to me like people want us to stay.
WALLER: Depends on what poll you have -- I wish we could get out in six months.
ROTH: How much does one man make a difference? Will Bolton, as someone said in the newspaper, stay in his lane, or will he be able to do things on his own and be a little private steamroller? Michael.
WALLER: I think he can be a really good leader in the sense that Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Gene Kirkpatrick were when they were ambassadors to the United Nations.
Bolton's role now, he's not a cabinet member, he doesn't have the inside principles position in the White House --
ROTH: Sort of a tough love situation for the United Nations?
WALLER: Yes, but he can lead by example, and I think he's going to do that. He's not going to take any nonsense from a lot of the really bad elements out there who aren't not doing the world any favors by doing things the way they are. And he's going to blow the whistle on them.
ROTH: Phyllis, you were there. Bad elements?
BENNIS: No, I don't think the issue is bad elements. I think that what we're dealing with here is not tough love. There is going to be a lot of toughness, not a lot of love.
We should remember that this is a man who once said when the United States leads, the United Nations will follow. When it suits our interest to do so, we will do so, we will lead. When it does not suit our interest, we will not.
What it means is that John Bolton has a very tactical view of the United Nations. It should only be taken seriously, it should only be given any credibility, when it can be used as a tool of American foreign policy, as the Clinton administration's ambassador once said very explicitly -- the United Nations is a tool of American foreign policy. That's John Bolton.
ROTH: But Phyllis, you need -- it seems only the United States at times is going to act. I mean, on Sudan, they wanted to call for sanctions. The Security Council couldn't agree. A lot of logistical operations -- you need a strong United States and it seems like the other countries are -- go ahead.
BENNIS: Sorry, Richard.
The United States right now is what stands against the Security Council referring to the International Criminal Court those who are responsible for the genocide in Sudan, in Darfur. It's only the United States that is refusing to allow that to go to the International Criminal Court --
ROTH: And what is going to happen when John Bolton -- and John Bolton is certainly no fan of the court -- Michael.
BENNIS: Indeed.
WALLER: No, not at all, but he not a fan of it for a specific reason, and that is because it would basically put the U.S. Constitution under the direction of the United Nations and it would subsume our constitution and our own country's laws to an un-elected body of a foreign organization that is made up of dictatorships and other regimes that certainly don't represent the will of mankind, let alone our own country. So it's illegal by our own constitution.
BENNIS: Sorry, Michael, I don't think you understand how the International Criminal Court works. First of all, it's not a court of the United Nations.
WALLER: I understand exactly how it works.
BENNIS: It doesn't work that way. It's an independent court and it only takes responsibility for crimes like crimes against humanity and genocide. It doesn't take over from anyone.
ROTH: Michael --
WALLER: It would put -- American service personnel, American officers, and American leaders would risk being put on trial by a foreign court for crimes.
BENNIS: If they committed genocide, they should be.
(CROSSTALK)
ROTH: I advise you to look at several previous programs on the International Criminal Court.
Michael you mentioned bad nepotism at the United Nations. Care to be specific -- very briefly.
WALLER: Well, I'm referring specifically to the secretary-general's - -Kofi Annan's son and the Oil For Food scandal.
ROTH: Well, nothing has been determined yet. We don't know for sure.
WALLER: It hasn't been determined, but since when do you have the secretary-general's own son running a multi-billion dollar program that has no transparency?
BENNIS: He wasn't running anything.
ROTH: The son was not running the program.
WALLER: Well, no. It reeks of crookedness, it has no transparency.
ROTH: What about Secretary of State Powell having his son as the director of the Federal Communications Commission?
WALLER: That was confirmed by the Senate. That was not nepotism. It was a Senate confirmation by a body of elected officials elected by the people of this country.
BENNIS: And Kofi Annan's son never worked for the United Nations. Let's be very clear. He worked for Cotechna, a company in Switzerland.
WALLER: It doesn't matter. He was part of the whole program that was managing --
(CROSSTALK)
BENNIS: No, he wasn't, as a matter of fact. There's not even allegations that he was. There was an allegation that it looks bad. That's it.
ROTH: We're going to have to -- thanks for looking good on our show.
WALLER: They're opaque and they are not being allowed to examine it and they're not being allowed to --
(CROSSTALK)
ROTH: There is a report coming up later thing month on Kojo. We're going to know the real story, if critics will believe Paul Volcker. We'll find out.
Thank you both Phyllis Bennis and Michael Waller, both in our CNN Washington studio. They both work for different institutes. I have no time to name them. Thank you.
The new U.S. ambassador will one day have a new office in a new U.S. mission in New York. Years after John Bolton said you could tear down ten floors from the U.N. headquarters, across the street they have now completed the tear down of the 12 story U.S. mission.
Coming up a senior U.N. official who is trying to build his place up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Do you think this was a hostile act against you and the United Nations, by appointing Mr. Bolton. (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
ANNAN: Well, I'm not sure I want to be drawn on that one.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROTH: Secretary-General Kofi Annan offering congratulations to the presumed next U.S. ambassador, John Bolton, but not willing to interpret what his selection means.
So that means that we can ask his relatively new chief of staff Mark Malloch Brown joins DIPLOMATIC LICENSE in the studio to discuss the U.S.-U.N. relationship and other U.N. issues.
The last time we walked to you, Mark, we were touring tsunami- struck Asia and you were going to continue in your role as U.N. Development Program chief.
But are you going around the U.N. building closing windows and locking doors in advance of John Bolton's arrival?
MARK MALLOCH BROWN, U.N. CHIEF OF STAFF: Well, look, I mean, obviously there is a lot of nervousness about him coming. But I think a lot of us also see a silver lining.
We've had lots of different positions in Washington administration being engaged with the United Nations, but many in Congress are very negative and unengaged. I hope John Bolton can bring Washington together into a clear sort of set of reformed demands, if you like -- what they want from us. And that would be useful.
ROTH: I mean, this could make it easier for you. You have a new bad cop in effect. You could end up telling these countries "Hey, look, Bolton says you are not getting that committee funding." I mean, the jig is up.
BROWN: Well look, I don't think the U.S. relationship with at the U.N. ever works that easily. Everybody defers to the United States because of its power, and if it's got a formidable spokesman, like I expect Bolton will be, probably a bit more so.
But at the end of the day, the United States cannot get its way at the United Nations if it acts like a kind of unilateral demand-maker. This is a multi-lateral place. People have to compromise with each other.
ROTH: But there has been a lot of criticism of the United Nations. Let's listen. We could have selected from a bevy of 45 Congressmen, anti- U.N. sound bites, but here's a California clip.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. DANA ROHRBACHER (R-CA): The United Nations must reform or it will totally lose credibility and sink into irrelevancy. We can no longer allow the United Nations to be so arrogant and so un accountable as it has been.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROTH: You visited congressmen and I don't know if you made much headway because days later they held two days of anti-U.N. hearings.
BROWN: Well, Congressman Rohrbacher, who you were just quoting, was indeed one of those I visited, so clearly I didn't change his mind.
But on the other hand, Rome wasn't built in a day, and I think the important thing was to open a channel of conversation with these congressmen, to show that we too believe in reform and that where they have concerns and want more information about what were doing, want to look into what we have done in the past, we're trying to find constructive ways to help them do that.
ROTH: What is your biggest concern? You're just one man, and what did you find when you came there -- it's just been two months ago, but some people are already criticizing you about your selections and staff actions. Already you're taking heat.
BROWN: Good. I must be doing something. And, of course, for me the main dynamic of the U.N. proper is a huge, deep seated inertia. The difficulty of really making things change and happen.
So to the extend that I'm getting criticism for decisions, I think I must be doing OK.
ROTH: But is it to late for you? There are people in the building who said there is a gloom, doom -- this is just not describing the outside physical condition of the place.
Did Kofi Annan take his hand of the till? Or did your predecessor, Ichbol Reesa (ph), lose sight of what was going to happen?
BROWN: Look, this has been an enormously successful secretary- generalship, as you've often reported. Eight years culminating in a Nobel Prize and then sudden sort of fall from grace because of Oil For Food. But it was eight years of reform and diplomatic success around the world.
And you know, there is kind of a feast or famine dimension to the coverage. A lot is going well or a lot of U.N. people are doing a great job every day and coming to work happy.
So I think the stories of gloom can be overdone.
ROTH: Is Kofi Annan a good manager?
BROWN: Kofi Annan is a great leader of the United Nations. I think it is almost impossible to be secretary-general and a manager. It is the most full-time job imaginable.
He is a leader, and he is a diplomat, but he needs people around him to help him with the management.
ROTH: But was he let down or did he really do a bad job and not grill Benon Sevan, who has been accused by Paul Volcker of conflict of interest, and a few other people, and just the general operation of the place.
There was an improvement. There were tons of meetings and other things, but what went wrong?
BROWN: Well, clearly there was a lapse in management systems, and I don't think it's Kofi Anna. I mean, his desk is too full. And the nature of the way that the reporting to him on Oil For Food didn't make him the person responsible for tracking shortcomings. That was the so-called 661 Committee of the Security Council, the oversight bodies, such as Audit.
ROTH: What about Ruud Lubbers, now the former refugees boss. The internal U.N. probe said that in effect he was guilty of harassment of women. Yet, Kofi Annan overrode that and gave him a warning. Big mistake?
BROWN: Well, no, because he went outside and got information --
(CROSSTALK)
BROWN: -- got a lawyer to tell him whether or not this case would stand up, and was told it wouldn't.
But, you know, the behavior of Ruud Lubbers is after that, the continued --
ROTH: How upset were you when he came downstairs, we saw it a few weeks ago, and said the secretary-general did not ask for his resignation, and he appeared like he didn't have a care in the world?
BROWN: Well, we made it very clear within minutes that indeed his resignation had been discussed and indeed his resignation --
ROTH: Was that your call? Are you the head of the upstairs? Are you telling Kofi Annan every day you've got to cut him loose? You know the way the American Western style of bad --
BROWN: Look, I'm a simple Brit, a little overweight but in no other way heavy.
ROTH: All right. Well, what about the future? You go around the country, in America, it's an important leap for you. Everybody knows only about scandal, whether it's the Weather Institution, Congo U.N. sexkeepers (ph), Ruud Lubbers, Oil For Food. How are you going to overcome this? You only have a year and nine months left?
BROWN: I think time is not in our effort. It is very late in the secretary-general's term to be facing these kinds of problems, but first they do know a bit more about us. After all, the tsunami relief effort dominated the American media and the global media for about a month and the United Nations was at the center of that story, as it is today, trying to kind of solve the problem with Syria and Lebanon or the Middle East.
ROTH: I mean, it's a problem the way the place has been set up. Obviously, it's the countries, but Kofi Annan is the feature guy. Should he be speaking out more publicly? When he called a meeting of the Security Council last Monday about Sudan it ended up turning into just a simple statement read by his spokesman instead of the secretary-general saying I've called this meeting and this is what I need.
BROWN: I think in that case, the fact he called the meeting was a statement in itself. The Security Council has taken a long time to get a desperately needed resolution on Sudan and --
ROTH: But nobody is going to put the heat on the deputy Russian ambassador or the deputy ambassador from Guinea (ph).
Why doesn't Kofi Annan do the "Oprah Winfrey Show" or any popular American programs? Why continue these op-ed editorial pages by the secretary-general, which he did for the "Wall Street Journal" and others? That audience already knows his opinion.
BROWN: Well, I think, you know, why do DIPLOMATIC LICENSE? Because an awful lot of people around the world who either care about the United Nations -- or if they don't care about it, nonetheless have strong views, and they're people we need to stay in touch with.
But I think it's a good point. We'll take the media tip. I think we do need to reach to middle America much more than we do.
ROTH: Is Dileep Nair, the U.N.'s own internal watchdog, going to survive? He's accused of also other activities?
BROWN: Well, we're looking into it. I have been clear with him and with the staff that if the allegation they've made against him meet a reasonable standard of merit, there will be an external investigation.
ROTH: The staff says, why doesn't the secretary-general go around the building, like he did after 9/11, a more personal touch. They feel down, depressed. There are just meetings and conferences. It doesn't do it.
BROWN: He's been doing that. He's been -- he was over at (UNINTELLIGIBLE), the department which dealt with the tsunami, to thank them for what they've done. He's got a whole lot of other --
ROTH: Are the countries of the United Nations smelling blood in Annan's case? First time they have blocked or at least opposed his nomination for World Trade Organization. There is a one month hold on it by the G77. That's not common.
BROWN: Very unusual, I think. But I think what lies behind it much more is a general anxiety that is the United Nations keeping its balance between the United States and the rest of the world, and I think they'll see in our senior appointments in the coming weeks that we are more than meeting that standard.
ROTH: Is Kofi Annan going to survive as we sit here and finish out his term?
BROWN: Absolutely. I think so. Because whatever you say about other governments, the bottom line is that most of the world retains confidence in him and would see his departure as a kind of political assassination.
ROTH: OK. Well, we've got to see your departure now, but it's on better terms.
Mark Malloch Brown, the deputy chief for Kofi Anna, the U.N. secretary-general, who has been on our program, but we don't like to call him every week.
Calling all worldwide U.N. staff employees, or regular viewers, send us an email with your opinion of the United Nations, the chief of staff's outlook, thoughts on John Bolton's nomination.
The e-mail address, Diplomatic.License@cnn.com. Once again, that's Diplomatic.License@cnn.com. No resumes, please.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROTH: You're looking at some of the toughest demonstrators ever seen across the street from the United Nations. They're concerned about the African country of Cote d'Ivoire, not seeking shelter. It's not easy on a sunny day, even, to hear the cries of the citizens while you're inside U.N. headquarters.
That's DIPLOMATIC LICENSE. I'm Richard Roth, in New York. Thanks for watching.
END
TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
|
