John Bolton will carry to the United Nations a damaged reputation and diminished ability.

President Bush was able to break a deadlock in the U.S. Senate by appointing Bolton during a congressional recess. The maneuver means Bolton takes his post without the confirmation of the Senate and can serve only until the next Congress convenes in January 2007.

While Democrats have presented a solid block of opposition to Bolton’s nomination, he also has detractors in the Republican Party who kept his nomination sewed up by procedural delays and filibusters.

“This post is too important to leave vacant any longer, especially during a war and a vital debate about U.N. reform,” Bush said during a press conference Monday announcing the appointment.

We agree. Unfortunately, Bolton was never an ideal candidate for the position. Bolton holds the United Nations in contempt, is a fiery opponent of multilateralism and has tried to intimidate intelligence analysts who offered opinions different from his own.

The United States should be working to repair the rift in the international community created by the invasion of Iraq and find a way to increase the role of the United Nations in places like Sudan, which is in desperate need of intervention.

Instead, Bolton will be a catalyst for criticism from an international community skeptical of U.S. foreign policy. It will be difficult – even in areas where change is clearly needed – for Bolton to advocate for reform because the world knows his tenure is limited to just 17 months.

There’s a reason the Senate has the duty to investigate and confirm high level diplomats: It’s to ensure that only the most qualified represent the United States to foreign powers. Bolton’s recess appointment is not about reforming the United Nations; it’s about using any means necessary to overcome impediments to the president’s power.