The investigations into the Oil for Food program are still in process of course, so we can merely speculate as to what eventually be found. Preliminary evidence though seems to indicate that Saddam and Iraq seriously abused the program to the tune of several billion dollars…and lots of companies were directly involved. In addition, as the UN was supposed to be monitoring the program, they seem to have dropped the ball to some extent.
Now, I don’t want to get into any speculation right now about other countries who may or may not have been involved in the corruption (or officials from other countries I should say), nor talk about what effect this may or may not have played in the UN and the SC’s decision’s reguarding Iraq…I think its way to early to even talk about all that, and there isn’t any solid evidence at this point (if I’m wrong about that, please cite your sources…don’t hijack the thread with mere speculation).
What I want to talk about is the effect just what we know so far will have on the UN…especially here in the US, but also throughout the world. Should Kofi Annan resign? And from a purely theoretical perspective, if Annan was involved directly in the corruption could he be prosecuted? If so, who would prosecute him? What kind of penalties could be imposed? (FWIW I actually don’t know if he was involved directly or not…I’m just asking because I’m curious about what legally could be done to him IF he were guilty).
Finally, does the UN have the right to block the US’s independant investigation because they are investigating it internally? SHOULD they, even if they do have the right? How independant will their own internal investigation be? How reputable will its results be? Should the US be independantly investigating this at all?
I heard that the French bank Paribas, was involved in this scandal. Supposedly, Saddam transferred cash to his cronies, via this bank.
So those millions of starving Iraqi children (hat Al-Jazeera always raved about) starved because Saddam Hussein stole the money intended to pay for food imports? C’est la vie!
Last I heard, our old buddy Ahmed Chalabi had all of the oil-for-food documents from Saddam’s government. Has that changed? I could be wrong, but my understanding was that that fact was holding up any credible investigation into the program.
Well, I have to admit I was hoping for some more substantial answers to the OP…but I suppose it does break down as a partisan issue.
Er…I’m not sure I’m following you here. Are you saying that the US is the pot calling the UN (kettle) black?? Could you elaborate some on that? Why do you think the US is as black as the UN on this issue (if I’m reading what you said correctly)?
Afaik there is no proof of any of that yet. Nor, if its true, would it necessarily mean much of anything except that a French bank was subverted. Its all pure speculation at this point. I’d kind of like to focus on what we know for sure right now and debate what, if anything, it will mean about the UN both here in the US and in the world.
My understanding is that the UN is with holding key internal audit information as well as other key data because they are doing their own internal investigation and don’t want it corrupt (though I’m unsure how giving copies of said documents to the currently US investigation would corrupt their own investigation). I don’t know anything about what you are talking about and haven’t heard anything on that line as far as why the investigation is stalled. If you have info I’d be more than interested in looking it over though.
Thanks for answering at least part of the OP. I happen to agree…I think he should step aside and out of the way while the investigation is conducted. I also think the UN shouldn’t be auditing itself on this thing but that an outside agency should do it…less chance of a whitewash then. I’m not necessarily saying it should be the US mind you, though I’m not really sure WHO it should be to be honest…just that it shouldn’t be the UN doing it internally.
Well, one question would be who exactly it was who dropped the ball. I’ll admit that I haven’t been following this story that closely so I don’t claim to have much knowledge, but here is a piece in The Nation that argues that Security Council members in general, and the U.S. in particular, may be to blame for the lack of effective oversight:
Why the US in particular? We are only one nation after all…and it seems none of the OTHER nations seem to have blocked kickbacks either. From your cite:
Also, it seems the US did block some contracts…just not supposedly to stop kickbacks (and appearently under the Bush administration if it was in 2002…or maybe it was just on hold until them, I’m not sure exactly what that part was saying). From this cite anyway. I’ll need to do some digging into exactly why the Clinton administration (and perhaps later the Bush administration), with supposed full knowledge of kickbacks, choose not to block or delay those specifically targetted contracts…I’m a bit skeptical that they did, or that there wasn’t some good reason for it.
So, its your contention that the UN is fairly well innocent then of this…in an overall sense? Thats kind of the way I read the article, that the US tried to bring it up but that the other nations weren’t interested in doing anything about it so they just let it slide. Would you say then (to get to the OP) that this will have no effect on the UN’s perception in The World™? How about in the US?
Kofi Anan should NOT resign…yet. The nature and depth of this mis-management should determine that. If he is determined to be directly involved, then he should resign, forthwith. There should be absolutely NO prosecution, because the Oil for Food setup, U.N. Resolution 661, the U.N. 661 Comittee, the Office of Iraq Programmes and all other related programs that punished the Iraqi civilians for the crimes of their NON-elected leaders were criminal in their inception. The U.N. does have the right to block any individual countriy’s independent investigation on the grounds that this is a U.N. internal issue and it should BRING TOGETHER the invesigative scrutiny of ALL of it’s Security Council members so that any result can not be miscontrued as being [enter U.N.S.C. permanent member name] biased.
Josh Marshall has been following this since the spring. It looks as if there have been no reports of anyone being able to authenticate the documents in Chalabi’s possession, plus the guy who had doing the investigating (don’t know if new people have taken over this role or not) was a longtime pal of Chalabi’s.
There are links to supporting articles in the posts themselves. Also, searching the site’s archives for “Chalabi AND food” will net you a few more posts.
The US is in a unique position to conduct this investigation. (Since obvously, the UN’s internal investigation is going to be worthless, not to mention bizarrely secretive.) It sits on our land, which could change, and a quarter of their funding comes from us, which could also change. It seems apparent that the UN is in full cover-up mode, so we can hold those two swords over their heads if need be to get our investigation done.
Well, the U.S. in particular part would refer not so much to the kickbacks part but the whole thing with Jordan and also with the Multinational Interception Force.
Well, like I said in my post, I really haven’t followed this story closely enough to have my own contention. I posted that article because it provides an interesting point-of-view that one doesn’t seem to be hearing in the U.S. press on the subject. But, I agree that more research would be needed to determine how accurate the article’s contentions are.
Yeah, because anyone except credulous Bush supporters eager to lap up whatever puss oozes out of the teat of this administration will believe anything a US investigation has to say about the matter. :rolleyes:
I’m sure the US investigation will be completely out in the open. That has been the MO of this administration, after all. :rolleyes:
Has the US paid up it’s debt to the UN yet? If not, I can’t imagine that the UN is going to be too afraid of the the US withholding funds it does not pay.
Well, I’m no ‘credulous Bush supporter’ ‘eager to lap up whatever puss oozes out of the teat of this administration’, but ya…I’d trust more what the US (NOT the Administration…you seem to be confusing the two concepts which are actually quite separate) finds than what the UN finds in an internal and closed investigation. Just call me unreasonable, but whenever an organization audits itself behind closed doors I’m a bit skeptical of what findings they will make.
Er…I don’t think The Administration™ is doing the investigation Neurotik. If I remember correctly the Senate is doing it…and its a bipartisan effort. Also, it HAS been pretty out in the open, with them releasing findings as they go along. But, don’t let any of this get in the way of a good rant!
Er…what debt do we owe to the UN? I thought we owed the World Bank some money…but thats separate from the UN…no? Or do we owe the UN some other debt I’m unaware of (certainly possible).
Considering most of the evidence for this so far has come from the CIA and CIA-paid stooges, I don’t think that there’s much of a difference at this time.
Very true, but I’d trust the UN behind closed doors before I’d trust the US Senate in the open at this point.
As far as I’m aware, so far it sounds like the Senate is doing it’s investigation much like it investigated WMD claims before the war. Swallowing whatever evidence the CIA feeds them whole.
The US had not paid its dues for several years during the 90s, with arrears nearing a billion dollars. There was some talk a while back of paying it off, but I’m not sure that it ever happened.
Done trying to throw a smokescreen up for ol’ Kofi? Your pathetic attitude, should it prevail, will just ensure that the UN remains a corrupt body. I wonder why some of you are so damned willing to just sweep this matter under the rug? 20+ billion dollars gone towards bribery, and the best you guys have is some moronic quip about Bush.
Ok, I suppose I see your point. I don’t agree, but I see where you are coming from. But why trust the UN to do the investigation right? Even if you have a gut level distrust of all things the Senate or Congress does, I don’t see how that gives you confidence in an internal UN investigation.
I never heard that before. Must have totally missed it. Was there a reason why we didn’t pay our dues (presumably) under Clinton?
And its nearing a billion dollars?? Just how much ARE these dues? Gods.
I happen to agree…I think he should step aside and out of the way while the investigation is conducted. I also think the UN shouldn’t be auditing itself on this thing but that an outside agency should do it…less chance of a whitewash then. I’m not necessarily saying it should be the US mind you, though I’m not really sure WHO it should be to be honest…just that it shouldn’t be the UN doing it internally.