Harsh Critic of U.N. Named Ambassador

President Bush on Monday nominated State Department official John R. Bolton to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, selecting an administration loyalist who has disparaged the world body and clashed with allies over Iran and North Korea policy.

Bolton’s approval seems assured by the Republican majority in the Senate. But with congressional Democrats ex- pressing dismay over his selection, the confirmation hearing may be rancorous.

In announcing Bolton’s nomination, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called Bolton a “tough-minded diplomat” who had developed a “proven track record for effective multilateralism” as undersecretary of State for international arms control and nonproliferation, a post he has held since 2001.

“He knows how to get things done,” she said.

Bolton’s supporters see him as someone who can be trusted to advance the president’s agenda at the United Nations and push for reform there. Detractors of Bolton, who has been championed by Vice President Dick Cheney, have criticized him as a hawkish unilateralist and neoconservative.

Bolton acknowledged Monday that his previous criticism of the U.N. was likely to raise concerns in some quarters. Among his controversial comments was a 1994 remark referring to the size of U.N. headquarters.

“The Secretariat building in New York has 38 stories. If it lost 10 stories, it wouldn’t make a bit of difference,” he said. And in 2000, Bolton told National Public Radio that the U.N. Security Council needed only one permanent member, the United States, “because that’s the real reflection of the distribution of power in the world.”

But Bolton pledged Monday to collaborate with Congress and other nations.

“Working closely with others is essential to ensuring a safer world,” he said.

Bolton’s nomination took many on Capitol Hill by surprise. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), who will preside over the confirmation hearing, declined to voice support for Bush’s choice. Lugar wants to meet with Bolton “before discussing his support,” Lugar spokesman Andy Fisher said.

Democrats criticized the choice.

“This is just about the most inexplicable appointment the president could make,” said Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.). “If the president is serious about reaching out to the world, why would he choose someone who has expressed such disdain for working with our allies?”

A senior Democratic aide said Rice had telephoned some senators to seek their support, comparing the choice of Bolton to “Nixon going to China” -- a reference to the anti-communist president’s surprise overture to Beijing in the 1970s.

Conservative Republicans and Israeli officials hailed the nomination. Many conservatives believe the U.N. needs a hard-nosed critic like Bolton to push for financial accountability.

Sen. George Allen (R-Va.) said Bolton understood the U.N.’s “failings and problems” and that he would “scrutinize the actions and expenditures of the U.N.” on behalf of American taxpayers.

Bolton is seen as having close ties to Israel, particularly on intelligence matters. Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom, during a visit to the U.N. on Monday, praised Bolton’s aggressive efforts to rid Iran of its suspected nuclear weapons program and called him an “honest guy.”

But diplomats from several other countries expressed disapproval. One European envoy, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the nomination could further tarnish America’s image abroad. Another said Bolton would have to learn about international cooperation.

“Finally, John Bolton will have an opportunity to find out what multilateralism is all about,” the second diplomat said.

When Rice took over as secretary of State last month, Bolton reportedly sought the No. 2 position in the department but was passed over in favor of former U.S. Trade Representative Robert B. Zoellick. The U.N. job, which was held until January by former Sen. John C. Danforth (R-Mo.), would be a major promotion.

As the State Department’s top arms control official for nearly four years, Bolton built an ad hoc coalition of more than 60 countries, known as the Proliferation Security Initiative, to intercept shipments of suspected weapons of mass destruction by land, sea or air.

However, some U.S. nonproliferation experts have publicly accused Bolton of exaggerating intelligence about weapons of mass destruction to make a case for unilateral American action against countries such as Cuba and Iraq.

Bolton has denied any misuse of intelligence. In a 2003 interview with the Los Angeles Times, he defended what he called his “zero tolerance” policy toward threats to American civilians from weapons of mass destruction in the hands of “rogue” states.

A Yale-trained lawyer, Bolton previously served in the State Department under President George H.W. Bush as assistant secretary for international organizations, the bureau that oversees U.N. affairs. He worked on U.N. reform and the repayment of overdue American contributions to the world body.

Rice noted that Bolton had worked to win the 1991 repeal of the U.N. General Assembly’s 1975 resolution equating Zionism with terrorism. She also said he had worked without pay for the United Nations from 1997 to 2000 as an assistant to former Secretary of State James Baker, then a U.N. envoy to the Western Sahara.

“If few Americans have direct experience working for the United Nations, I’m confident that fewer still have gained that experience on their own nickel,” Rice said.

As the third-ranking diplomat in the State Department, Bolton has opposed institutions such as the International Criminal Court. The court is supported by Europeans and many other countries, but he and some other U.S. officials say it could be used for spurious prosecutions of American soldiers, commanders and officials.

Bolton has been opposed to any moves for the U.S. to join Britain, France and Germany in trying to negotiate with Iran over its nuclear program. Last fall, as officials from the Group of Eight industrialized nations discussed diplomatic options, Bolton angered European allies when he issued a U.S. demand for a confrontational strategy that would subject Iran to U.N. economic sanctions.

That stance and his opposition to direct U.S. negotiations with North Korea on its nuclear program have made him arguably America’s least-liked diplomat.

Some saw Bush’s decision to nominate Bolton as an indication that the president’s recent fence-mending trip to Europe was more about style than substance.

“Just when you think Bush is changing his tune and doing the right thing and reaching out -- bam!” a Senate Democratic staffer said.

But Gary J. Schmitt, executive director of the neoconservative Project for the New American Century -- a job Bolton once held -- said Bush’s decision would have no effect on U.S. relations with Europe.

“There’s no question John has been a pretty strong critic of the U.N., but he’s not someone whose goal it is to get us out of the United Nations,” Schmitt said. “To the degree that people want the U.N. to work better, they’ll be pleasantly surprised by John’s work there.”

At the world body Monday, Algerian Ambassador Abdallah Baali said that when Bolton finds he must rely on the United Nations to further U.S. national interests, he may be less inclined to throw rhetorical grenades at the institution.

“The U.N. will change him, as it changes every ambassador who comes here,” Baali said. “The Bolton that we knew and the Bolton at the United Nations will be two different persons.”

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said he looked forward to working with Bolton on U.N. reform, among other things. Annan’s spokesman said the United Nations has “nothing against people who hold us accountable.” On the contrary, he said, the U.N. had been dealing with accountability and would continue to do so in the months ahead, said Fred Eckhard, the spokesman.

Times staff writers Maggie Farley in New York and Mary Curtius in Washington contributed to this report.