James at Outside The Beltway is linking a story from Fox saying John Danforth is resigning his post as US Ambassador to the UN. James seems ot think it somewhat strange that he’d be resigning so soon after he got the post, but you may recall the president had some arm twisting to do to get him into the post in the first place.

Even without that factor, consider the repercussions at home; Most Americans consider the UN to be somewhere underneath whale squeeze.  Oil for food isn’t likely to raise that perception any.

As for the question of who will replace Danforth..  it is an interesting one, and one that bears some watching..

The person in that role will need to be tough.. and know how to play hardball.

They’ll also need to see and believe in the President’s international vision.

To top that off, given that perception of most folks of the UN, such a person would need to have no political aspirations for their own future, because this would be a costly position, politically speaking.

James thinks Paul Wolfowitz would be an amusing choice… and I agree there’s some merit there, and along with that point comes the suggestion that Bush may in fact have to send one of his first-stringers to cover this role, given the requirements as I’ve laid out.

The answer to these questions will, I think, reflect the president’s intentions and degree of commitment as regards the UN. Mind you, it wouldn’t hurt my feeling in the least if Danforth didn’t get replaced. But, that would be a signal as well, wouldn’t it?