Shams, scams and Kofi Annan
Back to the International Organizations Page
27.03.2004
By ROGER FRANKLINAlmost a year ago, when kitchen workers at United Nations headquarters walked off the job in a dispute over holiday pay, the cream of the world's diplomats knew just what to do. They thronged to the site's five unattended restaurants and stole everything that wasn't nailed down.
As one witness marvelled after seeing an envoy make off with a baked turkey under one arm and a framed picture under the other, "They were locusts!"
The next day, however, the incident hadn't happened - not officially, anyway. A UN spokesmen swore blind that a senior official, concerned that his colleagues might go hungry, had granted permission for staffers to help themselves. There had been no mass theft, in other words, because after the event, everything was declared free for the taking.
As excuses go, that one had the benefit of brazen originality. With a few simple words, official honesty was once again the order of business inside the glass-fronted monolith overlooking the East River.
If all episodes of pillage were as easy to explain, the UN might not today be facing what is shaping up as the biggest scandal in its chequered history.
This time it isn't cutlery, baked hams and wine-cellar locks that have gone missing, but at least US$11 billion ($17 billion), depending on who is doing the counting - or rather, the guessing, since the UN has been curiously disinclined to investigate where all that money went.
Whatever the sum involved, it vanished from the UN-administered Iraq Oil For Food programme, and unlike last year's petty looting, those at the centre of suspicion aren't lowly bureaucrats but a tight cluster of high-up insiders centred on the office, family and inner circle of Secretary-General Kofi Annan himself.
To understand what happened - or better, what might have happened, because the UN isn't releasing documents and balance sheets - you have to go back to 1996, when the international body set up a system whereby Iraqi oil could reach the market only if the proceeds went to the "humanitarian relief" of the Iraqi people.
Two years later, at the end of 1998, the UN appointed a Swiss company called Cotecna to administer the programme, which would supervise the flow of some US$100 billion ($155 billion) in oil receipts, before it was finally shut down last November, when the UN reluctantly surrendered the job to the US-appointed Iraqi governing council in Baghdad.
What was Cotecna? For one thing, the former employer of Kofi Annan's son, Kojo, who was on the payroll until shortly before the contracts were awarded, when he became a contract consultant.
Cotecna's job involved squaring the income from oil sales against the goods that were allegedly purchased.
If Saddam's Iraq wanted to import ambulances from Saudi Arabia, the contract of sale had to be approved and the incoming goods inspected by Cotecna, as did tens of thousands of other items, from Russian hoes to Belarus welding rods.
In the first year alone, Cotecna pocketed $6 million ($9.3 million) for its services. After that, because the UN isn't saying, its share of the bounty is anybody's guess.
When Claudia Rosett of the Wall Street Journal began looking into the Oil For Food programme, she soon came up with one explanation: Many of the suppliers, like the Jordanian manufacturer of school desks listed on contract records, simply did not exist.
As Rosett has noted, Cotecna was responsible for approving "tens of billions worth of supplies inbound to a regime much interested in smuggling, and evidently accustomed to dealing in bribes and kickbacks". The issue, she explained in one of her painstakingly detailed investigations, was never "whether the monitors were cheap, but whether they were trustworthy".
Evidence of probity, however, is as hard to find as those notional school desks from Amman - or the ultimate destination of the money spent on them. The suspicion is that those deals, perhaps the overwhelming majority, were nothing but scams and shams.
Remember how opponents of the Iraq War kept citing the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children perishing for want of medicines? Well, Oil For Food was supposed to guarantee that those supplies arrived, but apparently few did.
Again, the UN's stonewalling makes it hard to determine exactly how much was fleeced, but there are some tantalising hints.
Before Oil For Food was handed over to Iraq, the UN conducted an urgent, last-minute review of thousands of contracts. Rosett calls it a "house cleaning", but whatever description is used, some 1500 supplier contracts - one in four - were immediately suspended or banned outright from further participation.
So where did the money go? Into Saddam's pocket is a good guess, with lesser amounts creamed off by the operators of front companies, smugglers and, perhaps, even UN officials.
According to the best estimate of the nonpartisan US Government Accounting Office, Oil for Food generated at least $10 billion ($15.4 billion) for Saddam's family and a further $1 billion ($1.54 billion) to pay the 1000-plus UN bureaucrats who were supposed to be keeping it honest.
Again, the focus is on Kofi Annan, who helped to set up Oil For Food in 1997 and installed his close friend and fellow diplomat Benon Sevan as its director.
Last week, with Rosett's ongoing series of exposes igniting a firestorm over the UN, Sevan wasn't answering his phone. According to a UN spokesman, he is using up accumulated leave before his official retirement.
For his part, a po-faced Annan now concedes "it is highly possible there has been quite a lot of wrongdoing", and has authorised an internal investigation.
Neither Rosett nor congressional investigators hold much hope that it will be more than a whitewash - and the UN has other matters that it would much prefer to talk about, starting with a $1.2 billion ($1.86 billion) interest-free loan from Washington to renovate its decaying New York headquarters.
George Bush rejected the request, saying the UN could have the money at the standard interest rate now being charged to American home-buyers.
As all the world knows, Bush doesn't have much of a way with words, which probably helped to keep the communications terse but diplomatic.
If the President was given to wit, he would have told Kofi Annan to get it from Saddam, who owes the UN big-time.
©Copyright 2004, New Zealand Herald
Reply 1 - Posted by: bobgray2, 3/26/2004 11:49:08 PM
And this is the group that Kerry wants to turn our security over to.
Reply 2 - Posted by: WeenerDog, 3/26/2004 11:50:05 PM
There was an old man named Kofi,
Whose corruptions were oh so lofty,
He took petro dollars
And right now he hollars,
"I'm no crook, I'm really a softy!"
Reply 3 - Posted by: No Left Turns, 3/26/2004 11:52:11 PM
Once again. A 24 hour notice to the UN and bring in the team that demo'd Veterans Stadium. The morons can regroup in Paris or something.
Reply 4 - Posted by: MrSpock, 3/26/2004 11:53:47 PM
What do you expect of the Third World criminals that run the UN?
Reply 5 - Posted by: grewco1, 3/27/2004 12:05:42 AM
Neither Rosett nor congressional investigators hold much hope that it will be more than a whitewash - and the UN has other matters that it would much prefer to talk about, starting with a $1.2 billion ($1.86 billion) interest-free loan from Washington to renovate its decaying New York headquarters.
George Bush rejected the request, saying the UN could have the money at the standard interest rate now being charged to American home-buyers. As all the world knows, Bush doesn't have much of a way with words, which probably helped to keep the communications terse but diplomatic.
I just love Bush!
Reply 6 - Posted by: nattering_nabob, 3/27/2004 12:07:03 AM
Rotten and dirty to the core.
Reply 7 - Posted by: veritas, 3/27/2004 12:32:05 AM
#3: As good a job as that crew did, we have a lot of skilled folks in our military, just back from even larger demo jobs in Iraq, and some Americans might like to see them do the job. A certain poetic justice, y'know...
Reply 8 - Posted by: Augie, 3/27/2004 12:53:10 AM
[This time it isn't cutlery, baked hams and wine-cellar locks that have gone missing, but at least US$11 billion ($17 billion), depending on who is doing the counting - or rather, the guessing, since the UN has been curiously disinclined to investigate where all that money went. Whatever the sum involved, it vanished from the UN-administered Iraq Oil For Food programme, and unlike last year's petty looting, those at the centre of suspicion aren't lowly bureaucrats but a tight cluster of high-up insiders centred on the office, family and inner circle of Secretary-General Kofi Annan himself.]
If we can't get rid of the United Nations altogether, can't we move it to Little Rock, Arkansas, where it belongs?
Reply 9 - Posted by: pismire, 3/27/2004 1:08:50 AM
Right On! No wonder the Clinton’s are so hot to head up the UN. The thought of taxing and spending on a global scale probably keeps them awake at night. The Billion dollar skim makes their multimillion dollar book deals look like pocket change. Not to mention the international pool of talented interns to choose from.
Reply 10 - Posted by: ForNow, 3/27/2004 1:39:49 AM
Read this article, it’s delicious, along with W’s Reaganesque remark at the conclusion.
Contrary to what the article says, W is given to wit, which I think is a reason that he gets a bit hesitant in speaking sometimes. Holding his tongue.
Reply 11 - Posted by: rockinqsranch, 3/27/2004 2:20:12 AM
These criminals are systematically destroying all documents pertaining to their guilt as we speak. The United Nations is nothing more than...why repeat #3 and #4. They are right on and I am just reinforcing their observations.
Reply 12 - Posted by: danu, 3/27/2004 2:33:19 AM
not only are we not getting rid of these parasites, they're seek a gazillion dollars
in interest free loans to redecorate.
aaarrgghh
it's not even nat'l pirate day, me hearties!
Reply 13 - Posted by: Grizabella, 3/27/2004 2:59:41 AM
Heard someone last night say the U.N. building should be converted into low-income housing for the poor or a high rise for the rich. I agree.
Good on your reply, Mr. President! Luvya' Dubya'!!!! Stick it to 'em.
Reply 14 - Posted by: valleystorm, 3/27/2004 3:27:41 AM
Hill and Bill set a nice example, didn't they? Or maybe it was just a case of 'birds of a feather...."
Reply 15 - Posted by: JAN, 3/27/2004 6:01:32 AM
I vote for Birds of a Feather!
Reply 16 - Posted by: pss, 3/27/2004 7:29:53 AM
I say let the building in NY rot and fall down and rid our country of the UN forever.
Reply 17 - Posted by: dainbred, 3/27/2004 7:39:49 AM
Folks; we SIMPLY have got to begin to DEMAND the USA withdraw from the U.N.
Imagine what we could have done in this nation with all the monies squandered to the U.N. who misused it.
IF we are going to be 'hated'.... lets be hated for a reason; keeping the funds here in the USA!!!
I'd respectfully suggest; e-mailing this article to all members of CONGRESS!!!
Reply 18 - Posted by: LEPhunt, 3/27/2004 7:47:08 AM
I think the U.N. has given GW another Campaign Ad...Have a picture of the U.N. and superimpose every Headline about corruption, Syria on the Human Rights Committee, U.N. Condemns Israel, U.N. honors Arafat...and then have a voice over with a quote from Kerry recommending subjugating U.S. Sovereignty to them.
Reply 19 - Posted by: Israeli Nightrider, 3/27/2004 7:54:59 AM
UN is a principal cause of terrorism in the World.
I understand that Bush can not attack on too many fronts just now, before the elections. But I hope he will not leave the second term without solving the UN problem in one way or another.
Reply 20 - Posted by: nevernaught, 3/27/2004 8:21:16 AM
Probably the best you could say about the UN is that it is far more corrupt than even it's worst critics imagined.
Here's a suggestion...if they won't submit to an honest audit, then we won't pay our dues.
Reply 21 - Posted by: jafo, 3/27/2004 8:24:26 AM
I say we schedule a televised controlled
implosion of the UN building - with Kofi
and the rest of these corrupt stooges inside
Take care of 2 problems - rid us of crumbling
eyesore and all these parasites in one blow
Reply 22 - Posted by: accipiter, 3/27/2004 8:24:56 AM
U.N renovations no, relocation yes!
Reply 23 - Posted by: Dolley Madison, 3/27/2004 8:27:15 AM
What WAS anyone thinking, who was involved in the establishment of this program through the UN?!?
They throw temper tantrums, and STEAL FOOD!! WHY would anyone think these... people, could handle money in sums of those amounts?!?
Incredulous! I believe IN that the UN is involved in terrorism.
We need to start a campaign to have the UN put out of the USA. Start writing to our representatives, make friends and relatives aware of what is going on at the UN. Time to move.
Reply 24 - Posted by: Sazedog, 3/27/2004 9:12:15 AM
The first acting Secregtary General of the United Nations when it was formed was Alger Hiss, a high U.S. government official and advisor to President Roosevelt who was also a communist spy. The U. N. has gone downhill from that point ever since.
As an arbiter of international disputes the U. N. is a failure.
As a preventer of war the U.N. is a failure.
As a forum to promote international peace, the U.N. is a failure.
The only thing the U.N. has accomplished is to provide party-time, luxury living, and top hats and limos for diapered diplomats from third world countries with almost no inside plumbing and with electric reserved only for the elite.
Get US out!
Reply 25 - Posted by: PJSam, 3/27/2004 9:23:07 AM
from the article....When Claudia Rosett of the Wall Street Journal began looking into the Oil For Food programme, she soon came up with one explanation: Many of the suppliers, like the Jordanian manufacturer of school desks listed on contract records, simply did not exist.
...Hope is postponded disappointment.....
...US politicans need to stop giving US taxpayers money to the UN...all they do is make these corrupt people wealthy and more corrupt....and because money and calls from US politicans is power...well the US politicans give away the US citizens power. The US politicans also keep corrupt governments in power with this money. Then these corrupt government leaders support the corrupt UN rather than the US....notice the worldwide votes from gov leaders not supporting the US.....we no longer give out the money (the UN does)(we gave them our power)...we must be abused with lies and guilt to give it up to the UN. The UN takes away the power of the people's vote and influence of local citizens of the world by giving US taxpayers money to the UN.
Reply 26 - Posted by: kelcom, 3/27/2004 9:48:00 AM
"Remember how opponents of the Iraq War kept citing the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children perishing for want of medicines? Well, Oil For Food was supposed to guarantee that those supplies arrived, but apparently few did."
So, finally we have the proof Saddam never had 'Medicines of Mass Deception."
I think this was all made up before 911 on Kofi's ranch.
Maybe Stan, MOTP or Mary Jo's diving instructor would like to share their wisdom and enlighten us on this issue.
Further, I wonder if Kofi is one of those still-in-the-closet 'world leaders' supporting Kerry for president?
Reply 27 - Posted by: LetGeorge1, 3/27/2004 10:32:07 AM
The US must get out of the so called UN and the US must kick the UN out of the US.
Then the US takes over the UN site, then puts Trump in charge of figuring out what to do with the site. The first thing of course will be the total destruction of the building then the sky's the limit.
Reply 28 - Posted by: Maybeth, 3/27/2004 10:50:40 AM
No WONDER Bill Clinton wants Kofi's job!
Reply 29 - Posted by: coppertop, 3/27/2004 10:50:47 AM
Egad!! Kofi Annan's picture is in the dictionary next to the word ''chutzpah''. Imagine the unmitigated gall of stealing $11 BILLION dollars, then coming to the victim and asking for an interest-free loan!!!!
It is my most earnest wish that the building fall down with all those 'diplomats' inside it.
Reply 30 - Posted by: Misty in the Mountains, 3/27/2004 10:59:44 AM
The excesses of the former first grifters is mind boggling and the excesses of their buddies more so. I have a feeling that some of the lamestream press/media do not like these 2, but are forced to be in their corner and anti-Bush to keep a job. I wouldn't be surprised if the vote for GW!!
Reply 31 - Posted by: Texas Pete, 3/27/2004 11:13:03 AM
The UN and the occupants of that big building are in need of a good housecleaning. I vote for flamethrowers.
