Recently, US President Donald Trump tweeted, in his trademark style, that John Bolton had been appointed as national security advisor, replacing Lieutenant-General Herbert McMaster in that position.
Bolton served in presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush’s administrations, while between August 2005 and December 2006, he was the US ambassador to the UN during George W. Bush’s presidency.
While away from politics afterwards, Bolton worked with a number of neo-conservative think tanks and was a commentator for the Fox News media group, and also wrote memoirs entitled Surrender Is Not an Option. The book deals with his activities as the US ambassador to the UN, and in particular, exposes the operational inadequacies that hinder the UN’s effectiveness in international diplomacy and its bias against Israel and the US. At home, he criticized the pernicious bureaucratic inertia in the US State Department that can undermine presidential policy.
“BAD NEWS FOR AMERICA’S ENEMIES”
The Democrats and some of the Republicans reacted to Bolton’s appointment with alarm. For instance, Senator Christopher Coons said that “Bolton’s views on Iran and North Korea are overly aggressive at best and downright dangerous at worst.”
On the other hand, the appointment of Bolton has been approvingly commented by legislators who are seen as “hawks.” “Selecting John Bolton as national security adviser is good news for America’s allies and bad news for America’s enemies,” said Senator Lindsey Graham.
BOLTON’S VIEWS
North Korea: The new national security advisor has long been a supporter of a military response to North Korean provocations. During a speech in Seoul in 2003 on the eve of the six-nation talks on North Korea’s nuclear program, Bolton called its then leader Kim Jong-il a “tyrannical dictator.”
Russia: Bolton is a longtime critic of the Kremlin. Recently, he denied allegations that Trump had conspired with Russia during the presidential campaign, although he believes that the Kremlin had intervened in the US election. When Russian President Vladimir Putin announced his decision to create new nuclear weapons, Bolton wrote on Twitter that “there needs to be a strategic response to Russia’s new nuclear missiles to show our allies in Europe that we will not let Russia push the US or its allies around.”
Ukraine: Bolton does not hide his skepticism about the idea to deploy a UN peacekeeping mission in Ukraine. He considers this a mistake on Ukraine’s part. According to him, this would mean intensifying Russia’s interference in Ukraine’s internal affairs, since Russia is a permanent member of the UN Security Council (which would make a decision on peacekeepers). “The main issue now,” he stressed, “is to prevent the Donbas from turning into a frozen conflict zone.”
The Iran nuclear deal: Bolton’s hostility to the deal is well known. He even advocated the violent regime change in that country. Given that his fellow Iran fighter Mike Pompeo was recently appointed US secretary of state, the future of that important diplomatic agreement is now in doubt.
Bolton is also known for his support for keeping the Guantanamo Bay prison camp open, relocating the US Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, and supporting Taiwan to increase pressure on the PRC.
However, Bolton has recently tried to tone his rhetoric down. “Frankly, what I have said in private now is behind me,” he told Fox News in an interview.
The Day asked American and Ukrainian experts to comment on the dismissal of McMaster and the appointment of John Bolton as national security advisor, and to tell us what Ukraine should expect from this change in Trump’s team.
“BOLTON IS BOTH PROPERLY TOUGH ON RUSSIA AND WELL INFORMED ON UKRAINE”
John HERBST, Director, Dinu Patriciu Eurasia Center, Atlantic Council; former US Ambassador to Ukraine; Washington, D.C.:
“There are a number of reasons for the dismissal of McMaster, which has been rumored for months. One, Trump and McMaster have never clicked personally. Trump seems to get along with Bolton. Two, Trump likes turmoil and change. Three, there are times that McMaster – like Tillerson and Kelly – spoke publicly and was then criticized by Trump. It seems that personal matters like these, rather than policy differences, explain the firing.
“Bolton advocates a more hawkish policy on Iran and North Korea than McMaster. The same is true for Pompeo. It is not clear that this will lead to more hawkish policies from the administration. Mattis and Dunford, for instance, think that we should not renounce the Iran deal. These are issues to watch. McMaster and Tillerson both understood the need to push back hard against Kremlin aggression and provocations. So, I do not expect major changes with the new team.
“Bolton is both properly tough on Russia and well informed on Ukraine. He attended the YES conference in the last two years and recognizes the importance of stopping Moscow’s aggression in Donbas.”
“SOMEONE WHO MAY BE ABLE TO SPEAK OPENLY AND CONVINCINGLY TO THE PRESIDENT ABOUT THE GLOBAL RUSSIAN THREAT”
Adrian KARATNYCKY, senior fellow, Atlantic Council’s Dinu Patriciu Eurasia Center; managing partner of Myrmidon Group LLC:
“John Bolton is a Foreign Policy hawk, he is tough on Russia, and he represents no softening on the matter of relations with Russia. Indeed, Bolton, who was close to George W. Bush can be said to be a new-conservative, having been a longtime colleague of Jeane Kirkpatrick at the American enterprise institute think tank. Most commentary seems to focus on the fact that trump and McMaster never developed a comfortable relationship.
“National Security Advisor is the person who has the greatest opportunity to inform the president on key issues and help shape his thinking. So a good personal relationship is an important part of the mix. Just a week ago Bolton asserted Russia, like China, Syria, and North Korea ‘are regimes that make arrangements and then lie about them.’ Bolton has asserted that thin ‘lies’ in the past and has argued that Western policy should ‘cause him pain.’ Ukraine’s leaders should not view this as a weakening of resolve on Russia, but the entry of someone who may be able to speak openly and convincingly to the President about the global Russian threat.
“In 2014 he called for speeding up the process of Ukraine’s integration into NATO, by reviving the Bush administration approach.”
“THE U.S. WILL BECOME MORE OPENLY SUPPORTIVE OF UKRAINE”
Oleksandr TSVIETKOV, Americanist, Professor, Borys Hrinchenko University of Kyiv:
“First of all, it will change, and also make more stable, President Trump’s team. In particular, I expect it to strengthen the element of foreign policy expertise, as opposed to military and strategic one. In addition, Bolton will now have an additional avenue of contact with the Department of State where he has long-standing connections, and perhaps it will bring about more consideration for the views (or rather hints) expressed in that department’s political experts’ opinions that come to the president’s table. The US may become more openly supportive of Ukraine, provided we engage in smart professional work with the administration and the entire (this qualifier is important!) Congress.”
