Why reject John Bolton?

Democrats flexed their new-found muscles last week by making it clear they were unlikely to confirm John Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. President Bush used his power to appoint Bolton as a recess appointment last year, but that is set to expire in January. Meanwhile, the president has once again nominated Bolton to the job and is holding firm.

If Democrats are truly interested in cooperation over politics, this is hardly a good first step. They seem focused on tired old arguments about Bolton's combative nature, rather than looking at his accomplishments so far at the United Nations. Bolton played a significant role in persuading China to hold firm against North Korea in the wake of that country's recent nuclear weapons test. He also is doing an admirable job of persuading Russia to join other civilized nations in applying real pressure on Iran to abandon its nuclear weapons program.

And Bolton is working hard on finding a diplomatic solution to the fighting that is killing thousands of innocent people in the Darfur region of Sudan.

Unfortunately, Democrats and many Republicans (Bolton did not have enough GOP support for confirmation in the Republican-controlled Senate) are showing that a person's reputation means more than the evidence of their ability to perform. Had Bolton done something outlandish, or had he been belligerent to the point of alienating allies in important matters, opposition would make sense. But it seems his enemies are fixated on the rather odd argument that he is too tough.

Given the many recent problems at the United Nations, from the oil-for-food scandal to the joke that was the Human Rights Commission (which in 2004 elected Sudan as a member despite its serious human rights violations), Democrats have never adequately explained why it is wrong to have someone tough represent the United States.

The United Nations will be effective only if it is made to enforce its resolutions and stand up to oppressors. It is doubtful voters last week meant to say they wanted a softer approach from their ambassador.