Love the idea of Prince Zeid Raad al-Hussein as UN Sec. Gen. Hope it happens(probably won't-Murphys Law-its a good idea!) When people gain power and can choose a more constructive venue to accomplish their goals they'll be less frustrated and less likely to turn to violent means to get their way. Small steps like this will help us win the "war on terror" much more than bombing people will.

did i awake this sunday in an alternative universe?

is mr clemons agreeing with mr bolton?

can we trust anyone that mr bolton supports?

"Can we trust anyone Mr Bolton supports?"

It is important to remember that there are smart people and dumb people amongst the core ideologues in the Administration. While W was a C- student at an easygoing Yale of the 60s and Cheney flunked out of an easygoing Yale (Twice),
Bolton was a summa at Yale after they had begun to tighten up the academics.

Bolton is an ideologue, but he is a smart one (like Paul W).

I've worked with Bolton in earlier days and seen John make many calls that were right on the money.

Do I trust him? Not particularly. But John Bolton is nobody's fool and I anticipate that he will make some very smart moves during his tenure at the UN. He may also make a couple of potentially costly ones as well.

JohnStuart

smart ideologues like bolton and wolfowitz still make dumb mistakes.

i would advance the idea that a "smart ideolgue"
is an oxymoron.

Personally, I see Zarqawi as little more than an extension of the boogie man politics Bush has used to cower America into compliance with his extreme and criminal endeavors. Heres a man that was reported killed once by the Pentagon. Than it was reported that he had lost a leg. Then he was supposedly pictured in the Nick Berg photos, whole of limb. And who can ignore his role in the script Bush has handed us about the "insurgency" in Iraq being comprised of great numbers of "foreign jihadists" whose only goal is death and mayhem because they "hate our freedoms"???

Allah has been kind to Zarqawi. If we are to believe the Bush Administration, he has been resurrected once, he has miraculously grown a new limb, he has single handedly derailed Bush's nobel and altruistic designs for the Iraqi people, and he has landed the top role as Bush's boogie man, pre-empting Osama's never ending re-runs and cameo appearences.

BOO!!!!!!

Iam deeply suspicious of anyone, repeat anyone, Bolton advances.

Fascinating update, Steve. Zeid has remained quietly in the background amid the speculation on the UNSG race, which may serve him well.

Those who want to see how the race has unfolded and keep up with developments should bounce over to UNSG.org and take a look.

Best,
Tony Fleming

Here's where I'm confused: was the 12 page letter supposedly to al-Zarqawi from Ayman Al-Zawahiri ever authenticated? IIRC, there were serious questions concerning it's validity. The only person I trust who has spoken as if it's the real thing is Peter Bergen, although I've never seen his arguement for why he thinks this.

If this letter is real, I will agree he is as dangerous as he is portrayed to be. But if the letter is fake, I'd be inclined to agree with the boogyman thesis concerning his importance.

And kudos to Mr. Bergen's book review. He rocks.

Why does Bolton have a credible say in this -- other than the "fact" that he's UN Ambassador for the US.

This sounds more like of the pre-Iran-invasion non-sense: Rather than focus on whether there should be an invasion, they've narrowed the choice down to "how should we invade." Very curious. It's time to look at the issue in a new way: Why can't we have someone else that pisses off Bolton more?

Last time I checked, Bolton has access to the NSA intercepts, so why does he bother commenting, and not do what he did with Iraq: Smear those who attempt to hold a different view. Bluntly, given his poodle friends on the Senate Deny-Obstruct-Obfuscate Intelligence Committee, why does the US bother to discuss anything?

Curious, the US is willing to “discuss” issues with foreign nations, but not willing to do that on local matters related to the Constitution, rule of law, and violations of the FISA by the President. Why the double standard on whether the US “leadership” does or does not discuss issues? That’s kind of curious – kind of like the non-sense over 9-11: “Hay, we don’t have to let you fly if you’re American; but if you’re a foreigner from Saudi Arabia, you can fly out, no problem.”

Let’s ask Bolton: What’s changed since 2002 that he would have to seriously consider another view and have to comment on something that the NSA-US should be able to orchestrate through the NSA-intercept-nexus? Things have changed. Bolton is still a scary dog. Woof!

My instincts are to agree with Farinata X, and hold that if Bolton favors Prince Zeid, then there must be something wrong with the latter.

But suspicions aside, Zeid looks like a solid candidate. He has, among other merits, the distinction of being a very strong supporter of the International Criminal Court and the Rome Statute.

I also learned in googling about him today, that he was the only representative from an Arab country to speak at the UN's Holocaust memorial ceremony in January 2005, marking the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, and apparently one of the few to even attend the session. He began as follows:

"It is appropriate for the General Assembly to commemorate the victims of the Nazi Holocaust on this day marking the sixtieth anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz; to honour those victims who are living and remember the millions who were murdered; to honour the liberators of that infamous camp and of all the camps, and to reflect on the wickedness of those who perpetrated crimes so disturbing to the human conscience that they were waged, in the words of Henry L. Stimson, “against civilization itself”.

"Whatever judgement future historians will make about the twentieth century in measuring the sum of our technical, scientific and literary achievements, it will be a picture transformed by the Holocaust and the wider war of aggression waged by the Nazis. So extreme were their acts of cruelty and the consequent suffering of European Jewry, the peoples of occupied Europe and the former Soviet Union, as well as of the disabled, the infirm and the weak, that we should expect nothing less than the contempt of future historians for how seemingly impossible it has been for humankind to be consistently humane or kind."

He then used the opportunity to make a plea on behalf of the ICC and the legacy of Nuremberg:

"For what sense can we make of a commemoration — this important commemoration — if our management of the legacy of the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg remains chequered, at
best?

"In Nuremberg, human civilization identified itself, at last, most clearly and profoundly. For in Nuremberg, we loosed ourselves from a past overwhelmed by the popularity of simple retribution, where summary actions had often only left room for further injustice, and we pointed ourselves towards a future where justice was to be obtained for those bearing the greatest responsibility — the most notorious perpetrators — and victims alike, solely by means of a fair trial, with a verdict formed only on the basis of the evidence brought before the court. For the surviving victims, Nuremberg, of course, laid down the unassailable truth: a precise and detailed record of how genocide, and all those appalling policies levelled at the enemies of Nazi Germany, were drawn up by the Nazis and then put to terrible effect.

"Over the past 60 years, and since Nuremberg, the thread of international criminal justice has passed through the Tokyo trial and the trials, famously, of Hess, Eichmann, Papon, Barbie, Schwammberger, Priebke and Hass, before finding extensive expression in the ad hoc Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda. Yet despite the important convictions, the laying bare of the truth, and the jurisprudence produced, all we seem to hear at present, in this Hall and in the Security Council, are complaints about the great expense of international criminal justice — with
the combined budgets of the two Tribunals approaching $300 million a year. When measured against the $900 billion the international community spends annually on weapons — that historic companion of war — surely a few hundred million spent on international justice — the surest companion of peace — is a worthy consideration.

"Similarly, what sense can we make of this important commemoration when there are still many countries which have yet to accede to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court? I take this opportunity to urge them to do so."

The prince did did not back away from alluding the problem of the Israeli occupation in Palestine, and suggesting an underlying connection between Israel's oppression and chauvinistic nationalism:

"What sense can we make of this important commemoration when we, the international community, have on occasion allowed, and still allow, not only chauvinistic nationalisms to exist — leading often to violence against others — but also subsequent events to transpire unchecked? And what sense can we make of this important commemoration, when through our inaction we allow, year after year, one people to dominate another, to deny them many of their most basic rights and so, with the passage of time, also to degrade them as a people?"

So Zeid looks like a fine fellow to me. But if one is looking for suspicious motives in Bolton's support, perhaps it has something to do with the general neoconservative taste for the Hashemite monarchy. Former Bolton chief aide David Wurmser was one of the ideological architects and signers of the now-notorious 1996 "Clean Break" strategy paper that was prepared for Benjamin Netanyahu. The authors recommended in that paper an effort to remove Saddam and somehow re-establish the Hashemite throne in Iraq. This "Hashemite option" was quite the rage among the neocons for a time.

Prince Zeid's grandfather Zeid was acclaimed head of the royal house in Iraq following the assassination of Iraq's King Faisal in 1958. According to the old Iraqi constitution, as I understand it, the crown passes down through primogeniture. Prince Zeid is the eldest son of Ra'ad bin Zeid, who was in turn the eldest son of the elder Zeid. Thus, for some old loyalists and nostalgists for the Iraqi monarchy, the next UN Secretary General might well be regarded as the rightful heir to the throne of Iraq. His positions on Iraq, as Secretary General, might be regarded by some conservative Iraqi shaikhs as particularly authoritative.

Now that would be an interesting coincidence, wouldn't it?

It also strikes me that a Hashemite leader of the UN could pose a potent counterbalance to the authority of the as-Sauds in Saudi Arabia, given the ancient and traditional Hashemite guardianship of the Muslim holy places in the Hejaz.

Steve.
Excellent! Informative and insightful tying of loose ends. Let's hope Bolton, despite himself, achieves something worthwhile at the UN.
Keep a close eye on him!
Miriam

WHO IS REALLY BEING MANIPULATED?

We are led to believe it's the 'Arab Street', with all of Al Qaeda's sophisticated propaganda tools.

Hmmm!?!

How about the American public? The U.S. Militaristic Superpower being at threat by the evil Inter-Galactic Forces of Zarqawi and Bin Laden. Hmmm?!? Just think about who controls the "radar" that continues to spew the fear-mongering.

Check out the following links. Whether one accepts everything or not, just stay informed.

* HOW U.S. FUELED MYTH OF ZARQAWI THE MASTERMIND
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/10/04/wirq04.xml
* BIN LADEN TAPES NOT GENUINE
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2526309.stm
* BIN LADEN TAPES: FACT OR FICTION?
http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/news_service/middle_east_full_story.asp?service_id=10544
* BIN LADEN VIDEO TAPE FRAUD
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osamatape2a.html

From the 'Arab street' the Jordanian royals are seen as bought-off tools of the United States, sellouts on the Palestine-Israel conflict, and ruthlessly repressive of even minimal dissent.

What a fine resume for Secretary General of the United Nations -- an institution that needs to be and to be seen to be less under the thumb of the United States if it is to have a meaningful future.

Recent demonstrations in Jordan against Zarqawi would indicate that you are incorrect Nell. Both about the Jordanian royals being repressive and about how the Jordanian royals relationship with the US is viewed. Unless you can show similar demonstrations against the US in Jordan.

I think Bolton's support for Zeid is right in line with his neo-con/PNAC leanings. It amounts to the throwing of a huge bone to Jordan just as the U.S. continues to mount threats of an attack on Iran. Jordan is and always has been in the back-pocket of the U.S.

I agree with Nell, above. Jordan is far from a democratic country. It is in fact a police state. Check the excellent article by Neil MacFarquhar in the New York Times on 11/14/2005, "Heavy Hand of the Secret Police Slows Reform in the Arab World," which finally gets it right.

Just because Jordan's monarchy tells Western governments what they want to hear, doesn't make it reformist. The Arab people are fed up with dictators, whether they dress up as princes, in military garb, or in civilian clothes. What "constructive signals" would the appointment of a son of priviledge like Prince Zeid send to the Arab street? The Arab world is aching for change, and Jordan's entrenched power, a remnant of the colonial system, is very much the old way of doing things.

Perhaps what John Bolton likes about Prince Zeid is that like George W. Bush he is an autocrat. He may be a fine individual, well spoken at cocktail parties, but is a state that spies on its citizens and suppresses dissent what we want to hold up as a model for the Arab world? It will make Bush's talk of the "savage flame of liberty" look even more like sheer hyprocrisy than it does already.

Steve, please think this through.

Not sure that the case could be made that King Hussein was in any way in the "back-pocket of the US". I believe that Hussein sided with Saddam during the 1991 Gulf war.

Whether or not you are a Bolton-ite.

The fact is, the UN is a dilapidated joke.

I cant believe that the Secy General is from the same continent where the Darfur situation is occurring, and he does and says nothing about, and when asked he simply puts a light coat of sugary syrup about hopes for the future.

Yet, he blabbers about Guantanamo Bay. Where some of the prisoners arguably receive more rights than actual US prisoners in the US prison system.