The controversy over the nomination of John Bolton to be the US ambassador to the United Nations is refusing to die down with fresh allegations being made about his 'attitude problem'  forcing the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee to delay a vote on his nomination. Bolton being an outspoken critic of the United Nations in the past, his nomination has raised passions in the United States and many other parts of the world. Bush has now left it to his Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to defend his decision.

In the recent past Bush has successfully managed the nomination of Paul Wolfowitz to head the World Bank but now he is finding it difficult in the Bolton case. Few ex-Department of Defence (DoD) officials have told the author that Bolton's nomination gives a clear signal that Bush values loyalty and he may go to any extent to reward one.

Surprisingly Bush's former Secretary of State, Colin Powell, is emerging as a behind-the-scenes player in this battle. Powell has not taken any definitive stand yet but his views are highly influential with many Republicans and Democrats. Bolton had served under him as his Under Secretary of State for arms control, and the two were known to have serious clashes. Powell has refused to sign a letter from seven other former US secretaries of state or defence supporting the candidature of Bolton.

Till date Condoleezza Rice has largely steered clear of this controversy but now, with things getting tougher, she has come to the rescue of Bolton. Many reasons are being cited against Bolton to stop him from reaching UN. Everybody is concerned about his autocratic thinking and stories about his alleged bullying of intelligence analysts to support his hard-line views. Also, radical views expressed by him regarding the UN in the past are going against him.

A former Secretary from DoD had opined to me that Democrates not only oppose Bolton because of his negative comments about the UN but also because of his temperament and 'attitude'. It appears that sending Bolton to the UN is not an innocent move on Bush's part. According to a few Republicans, Bolton could provide the 'medicine' the UN needs.

From India's point of view Bolton reaching to UN is not a very healthy sign. This move should be looked at the backdrop of larger policies followed by the US after the Iraq invasion. Already the architect of the invasion of Iraq, Paul Wolfowitz, has been put in charge of the World Bank that has been charged (in theory at least) with the challenge of developing the 'developing world' and now Bolton is tipped to go to the UN when countries like India are advocating structural changes in the UN and demanding representation in the Security Council. The way Wolfowitz' nomination has to be seen in the context of the pressures the growth of Indian and Chinese economy is putting on the US, the move to nominate Bolton should be seen at the background of Indian and German ambitions of reaching the Security Council.

Today, India's much-talked about progression towards global power status has been implicitly recognized with recent UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan's visit to New Delhi. China has indirectly agreed to India's presence at the Security Council. Baring the US other permanent members apparently do not have much of problems of India joining the coveted Council. Naturally the presence of Bolton may create problems to India's ambitions.

The recent visit of the UN Secretary-General has taken place at a critical juncture for India. Today the US understands the relevance of India in global geopolitics in general and for them in particular. The issue of outsourcing is being deliberated in the US on various forums. They understand the requirement of outsourcing but at the same time are skeptical about India's growing influence on their domestic employability pattern.

India has given a very warm welcome to Kofi Annan but refused him permission to visit Tsunami affected areas in the state of Tamil Nadu making it clear that they do not want to internationalize the problems which they can handle efficiently. Such forthrightness shown by India on various issues makes the US chary about India's presence at the Security Council. They want reforms in the UN but only on their terms. Nominations of people like Bolton should be viewed in light of such realities. Probably Bush has appointed Bolton because in the past he has displayed a pattern of abusive behavior towards subordinates and tried to force intelligence analysts into writing their analyses to suit his views. Naturally, to run the UN in the American way he is the best bet!