Bitter Medicine from Dr. Bolton for Germany...

According to SPIEGEL's print edition of March 20, 2006 (p. 17), due to tough U.S. resistance, Germany will get only limited access to the UN Security Council talks on Iran's nuclear program. Der Spiegel wrote the U.S. Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, refused entry to his German counterpart Günter Pleuger to the so-called P5 talks at the UN, and he continues to persistently call EU-3 proposals "British-French proposals".

Mr. Pleuger indeed is hard to imagine as participant in any talks with the U.S. at the UN. I vividly remember his sneering, arrogant tone during the UNSC talks pre the Iraq invasion. .

I gather Mr. Bolton felt he could do without this guy's advice.

No, Günter, you are not allowed in...

Update: Hey, it wasn't the first time John Bolton didn't allow a German in...

Comments

[Jorg]

It's "Gunter Pleuger" with the Umlaut.

"I vividly remember his sneering, arrogant tone during the UNSC talks pre the Iraq invasion."

Ach, well, I remember so many sneering, arrogant people before the Iraq war. What did Dr. Pleuger say that turned out to be wrong?

[Jorg]

Sorry, I meant WITHOUT the Umlaut. Anyway, no big deal.

[PacRim Jim]

Günter, go outside and play while the adults talk.

[J.T.]

The name of the man is Gunter not Günter. I think that is good news, Germany should keep her nose out of things that a not Germany's business.
Will save us a lot of time and money. Germany should declare neutrality on all issues not regarding Germany directly.

[Dave]

Actually I believe it is part of germany's buisness. If Iran gets nuclear weaponry, this would create a serious of problems for us (although they might not have developed far range rockets, we are not very far from them).

And when the US ambassador wants germans out, i guess that simply displays the true state of the relations.

[Tyranno]

I think that is good news, Germany should keep her nose out of things that a not Germany's business.
Will save us a lot of time and money. Germany should declare neutrality on all issues not regarding Germany directly.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The council is suppose to be about attempting to solve problems, not assuaging fragile EU egos. Why clutter the table with people who add nothing to the conversation.

JT posts:
"I think that is good news, Germany should keep her nose out of things that a not Germany's business. Will save us a lot of time and money. Germany should declare neutrality on all issues not regarding Germany directly."

Could there be a better example of a progressive liberal, ie...soft and feminized Germany depending upon "other" rough men willing to do violence in their behalf, so that they might sleep safe in their beds at night?

If only the extremist Islamic terrorist would declare neutrality and focus on fixing the horrible mess they have made for themselves. Unfortunately for JT and the rest of the world, Islamic extremists view the world as "their business" and are behaving accordingly.
Viewing the violence in France and throughout the "Old EUropean" part of the continent it seems to me the only information that will get JT and his girls riled up is when they discover that they don't give away kindergeld in muslim countries.
And the only questions they need to ponder and I suspect will have to answer in their lifetime, is whether or not their culture and their history is worth preserving and defending, and whether for a few pieces of kindergeld/silver they will submissively genuflect towards mecca as their new unassimilated Eurabian countrymen finally succeed in blowing up the Strasbourg Cathedrale. . . as a start.

Tyranno

PS: I see the mosques in every German and European city. Show me the churchs and synagoges in the Middle East.

[flux]

@Tyranno

What violence "throughout the "Old EUropean" part of the continent" are you referring to? Apart from what's happening in France, of course. And what's the connection between kindergeld and genuflecting towards mecca?

[grlzjustwant2havefun]

It's coming flux. The writing's been on the wall for awhile now.

[NConnolly]

There does not seem to be a valid reason to include a German contingent in the talks, unless ego-stroking is the objective. Thankfully it's not. Bolton did right.

[Don]

@Dave,

Actually I believe it is part of germany's buisness. If Iran gets nuclear weaponry, this would create a serious of problems for us (although they might not have developed far range rockets, we are not very far from them).

Also Jordan, Iraq, Egypt, Sudan, Hungary, Poland, Switzerland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Italy, San Marino, Dubai, Luxemborg, Austria, Ireland, Spain, Portugal, Andorra, Greece, Turkey, Ukraine, Kazakstan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Nederlands, Belgium, Libya, Chad, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia, Yemen, Kuwait, Afghanistan, etc. They are also close and deserve their say, don't you think?

Let's move the debate into the UN General Assembly and schedule at least 3 years for deliberations so everyone can fully express their national interest before deciding to do anything (or nothing).

And when the US ambassador wants germans out, i guess that simply displays the true state of the relations.

Yes, I think it does. You sound embittered, Dave. The fact is that based upon his past form I doubt that this German UN ambassador will have any answers at all. I don't see him as being positive enough even to advocate doing nothing. He would make impassioned speeches vetoing any plan whatsoever. Or try to anyway.

There is more than enough of that around, so why add to it?

[Dave]

@ Don

Thats a nice enumeration of countries. Now how many of them trade as many goods with Iran as germany does? Maybe that gives you a clue. If a country could damage Iran by an embargo, it is germany.

There is nothing embittering me either. Actually I dont even understand why german officials take part in the UN anymore. That organisation did not want us to participate any further, why should we support it any more? There is quite some money that could be saved after all.

[joe]

Dave,

That is an excellent point and an excellent question.

Many Americans have been asking the same thing. In fact, even more Americans are asking this now.

I for one would be happy for Germany to be a member of the UNSC. It could have the seat the US currently has.

[Don]

Good idea, joe. I like it.

Even better, bounce China from the UNSC and substitute Spain. That way Europe could have ALL the permanent memberships in the SC. All would be optimum and peace would reign upon the Earth!

[Don]

@Dave

There is nothing embittering me either. Actually I dont even understand why german officials take part in the UN anymore. That organisation did not want us to participate any further, why should we support it any more? There is quite some money that could be saved after all.

Welcome to the club. Germany did not get it's permanent seat (and permanent veto) on the UNSC last year, apparently due to the US voting against. I'm sure that rankles, it would anger me if I were a German.

I also remember this: http://www.dawn.com/2002/01/11/int15.htm

I remember that Germany had a part in it......

Yet - doesn't France represent Germany's POV pretty well on the SC? There are 5 permanent seats on the UNSC, three which are held by European nations (UK, France, and Russia). Do we need more Europeans or might it be an idea to widen the membership. Let's keep in mind that increasing the # of vetos to 15 or 20 is a sure recipe for paralysis. So who?

I would argue that India, Japan, Brazil, and South Africa have a much more compelling case for inclusion than does Germany. If we add Germany why not Italy, Spain, and Poland also?

http://www.dawn.com/2002/01/11/int15.htm

[Don]

Tell you what, Dave. I'd like to make a peace offering to Ambassador Gunter Pleuger. The man is much maligned, so here is a bunch of flowers for him (follow the link to see the flowers (and something else):

http://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/3596170699/qid=1143060721/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_11_1/303-5364490-5829061

Let's take up a collection - only 7.00 Euros plus shipping.....

[joe]

Some of you want to pretend the UNSC actually does something.

Given its track record, I see no reason not to give every member state the right to veto anything.

[Dave]

Don and joe

Do you guys realize that we want back the situation before any international communities decided what our countries should be allowed to do? Like before ww1?
At least every nation could battle it out against its foes without others interfering in those days :)

[Don]

@Dave

At least I offered a peace gift for the ambassador. Did you follow the link to see what it was? ;)

[Dave]

Don

Haha, yeah he might consider that book of great use for his charisma.
But I dont think his job is to make friends ;)

[MarkD]

I think the EU should have a seat. One.

Actually, I think the UN is a total waste of time and money. It is hopelessly corrupt, witness Oil for Food. It is way past time we kicked them out of the US, withdrew diplomatic immunity for their employees, and witheld our money. I'd prefer to see Kofi in front of a prosecutor being charged under the RICO statutes, but I'd settle for the UN gone.

[Don]

But I dont think his job is to make friends

Who? Bolton?

Actually I think the German ambassador is doing a great job of making new friends - like the Sudan. Trouble is that old friends are feeling very alienated and left out. Like the US.

Good luck with your new trade partners, Deutschland! Just remember to avert the eyes when the Janaweed go out for a little light-hearted genocide......