Bush, Bolton and the Bomb

In 20 years, when historians debate what the greatest failure of the GWB presidency was, some will opt for the fact that he cut taxes and raised expenditures just as we entered the era of entitlements overload, and while conducting an expensive foreign war. Others might consider the rupturing of the separation of church and state, and the consequences that befell the generation that followed. But the one that my money is on is the failure of the non-proliferation contingent of the Bush foreign policy.

By his recklessly calling Iran and North Korea part of the "Axis of Evil" along with Iraq, then attacking Iraq, Bush pushed those two countries over the edge into nuclear bomb-building. It can’t be put any truer or simpler. Neither had any nuclear bombs, then they were threatened by the world’s one superpower, then they proceeded to get the bomb.

To step back into the present imbroglio over John Bolton for a moment, the spin doctors of the Bush Administration have been touting Bolton these past several weeks by saying that the non-proliferation aspect of the U.S. foreign policy, headed by Bolton, was probably the most successful prong of our State Department, citing Libya’s stepdown as the glowing example of that policy success.

The fact is that the two nations in the world that we least want to have nuclear weapons, North Korea and Iran, have announced recently that they are moving irrevocably forward with their programs. As for Libya, as a condition of negotiation with Colin Powell, they insisted that Bolton not be present at the table. So even Libya saw him as an intolerably boorish bad actor.

To stay with the Bolton thing a moment, the spin surgeons are now all saying that a tough guy like Bolton is "needed at the U.N. to clean it up," as if his job is to be the U.N.’s new boss. An arrogant speechifier like him will not only be shunned at that establishment, he will further alienate Europe, China and the rest of the world, i.e., the other 95% of the planet.

Now, to bring this full circle, if we had been properly diplomatic (think Clinton, with Madeline Albright and Jimmy Carter as two main envoys) we could have gotten Europe to stop Iran’s program, as Iran has a large economic relationship with Europe. (Of course, not scaring them to begin with would have been the best thing.) But Europe no longer cares to do our bidding; they in fact express their animosity to this White House by doing the opposite when possible.

As for North Korea, if China wanted to stop them, they could at any time, as they are single-handedly propping them up economically. But they too are antagonistic towards us in general and this administration in particular, and wouldn’t mind seeing us twisting in the wind over this. Ultimately, they may very well help to resolve it, however, as the fact remains that if North Korea has bombs, Japan, Taiwan and South Korea will need to have them, which would be a direct threat to China, and exponentially makes the world a more dangerous place. But this will occur after North Korea has produced several bombs, and fissionable material, things they could easily sell.

So, looking back 20 years from now, those historians may well agree that this Bush administration's failed non-proliferation efforts were the worst of its many sins, and they'll undoubtedly show a picture of GWB together with John "Give 'Em Hell" Bolton, both with their crooked fat-cat grins, in the years before the incident or incidents where millions of civilians died by nuclear bombs manufactured in countries where their diplomacy miserably failed.