For secretary of state: John Bolton

President-elect Donald Trump has reportedly narrowed his search for the critical position of secretary of state to four men, including Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani. He might do well to look for someone with experience as a diplomat. How about someone with experience within the State Department and as a former UN ambassador?

John Bolton, now a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a regular commentator on cable news, does not engage in wishful thinking, or project American morals on those who don’t share them in the vain hope they might be contagious. Here is Bolton on the threat of radical Islamic terrorism: “When you have a regime that would be happier in the afterlife than in this life, this is not a regime that is subject to classic theories of deterrence.”

In his book Surrendering Is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations, Bolton is unrelenting in his criticism of the toothless UN and of many U.S. policies that have not produced results in America’s best interests—precisely the attitude of President-elect Trump, who wants to look out for America and its interests first. In this pursuit he is not unlike one of his predecessors, Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick, who said, “What takes place in the Security Council more closely resembles a mugging than either a political debate or an effort at problem-solving.” It is a mugging, and too often it is the United States and Israel who get mugged.

Here’s another Bolton quote: “Negotiation is not a policy. It’s a technique. It’s something you use when it’s to your advantage, and something that you don’t use when it’s not to your advantage.” That is the opposite of wishful thinking.

John Bolton does not engage in wishful thinking, or project American morals on those who don’t share them in the vain hope they might be contagious.

In a July 2015 column for The Dallas Morning News, Bolton wrote that it is a fiction to believe Iran won’t violate terms of the nuclear weapons deal it made with the Obama administration. He argued that “snapback” sanctions won’t work because sanctions failed before. He thinks the only option for keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of the ayatollahs is Israel.

“However, Iran may well retaliate,” Bolton acknowledged. “At that point, Washington must be ready to immediately resupply Israel for losses incurred by its armed forces in the initial attack, so that Israel will still be able to effectively counter Tehran’s proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah, which will be its vehicles for retaliation. The United States must also provide muscular political support, explaining that Israel legitimately exercised its inherent right of self-defense. Whatever Obama’s view, public and congressional support for Israel will be overwhelming.”

Who is to blame for this situation? Bolton wrote: “American weakness has brought us to this difficult moment. While we obsessed about its economic discomfort, Iran wore its duress with pride. It was never an even match. We now have to rely on a tiny ally to do the job for us. But unless we are ready to accept a nuclear Iran (and, in relatively short order, several other nuclear Middle Eastern states), get ready. The easy ways out disappeared long ago.”

This is sober reality and precisely the worldview that is needed at the Department of State.