The Washington Post has a Bolton story today headlined, “Foreign Policy Disputes Are Subtext in Battle Over Bolton.” The story is also notable for its on-the-record (!) favorable (!!) quote about Bolton from Dick Armitage. He points out that one of these allegations–as so many are–is really about a routine bureucratic dispute:

A new allegation has emerged in recent days that Bolton, in the midst of the Iraq war, delayed efforts to provide military funding for Baltic and Central European countries that were to join NATO, because they had not signed agreements exempting U.S. military personnel from prosecution at the controversial new International Criminal Court. Some of the countries wanted training to assist in their deployments in Iraq.
But the description of Bolton’s role in the matter differs greatly, depending on the bureaucratic perspective.
One set of current and former officials said Bolton opposed providing the funding until the countries signed what were known as the Article 98 agreements, even after a decision had been made to grant the countries a waiver. A second group of officials, including a former Defense Department official, said Bolton fully complied and in the end approved the funds. They said the Pentagon put up the obstacles.
Armitage said yesterday that he saw nothing wrong with Bolton’s actions on the funding.
“I didn’t consider this unusual at all,” he said. “Different fiefdoms at State often had different positions, and the deputy secretary resolved them. It was part and parcel of daily life.”