A rchive Date
[ 25-04-2004 ]
Category
[ International Relations ]
sub-Categoy
[ Iraq ]
|
[http://nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/19281.htm
THE FLEECING OF IRAQ
By MICHAEL SOUSSAN
April 22, 2004
THE House International Relations Committee opened its hearings on the U.N. Oil-for-Food scandal yesterday. Will we learn just who profited at the expense of the Iraqi people? The full answer may well resemble Agatha Christie's "Murder on the Orient Express." The classic "whodunit," in which it turns out everybody "did it," is a perfect model for understanding what happened to Iraq's national resources during the sanctions: Most of the international community was in on the fleecing of Iraq.
After months of intense media pressure, the United Nations finally set up an independent panel to investigate the scandal-ridden Oil-for-Food program, which allowed Iraq to export oil and import humanitarian goods during the sanctions. The General Accounting Office estimates that Saddam Hussein used the U.N. operation to extort $4.4 billion in kickbacks from Iraq's international trading partners.
It worked like this: Iraq would export under-priced oil, import over-priced goods, and cash in the difference through friendly middle-men. This occurred in plain daylight, right under the U.N.'s nose, with the complicity of hundreds of international companies, and possibly, the knowledge of many governments that had seats on the U.N. Security Council.
Beyond the kickbacks, Saddam was able to smuggle an estimated $5.7 billion worth of oil and fuel out of the country in total violation of the sanctions. Hundreds of trucks would enter Iraq from Turkey filled with goods bought under Oil-for-Food - then drive off again with fuel destined for sale on the black market. Other smuggling routes included a pipeline through Syria, and ships sailing Iranian territorial waters.
This sanctions-busting trade provided no benefit to Iraq's civilian population. In fact, it created drastic fuel shortages inside Iraq. And again, it could not have occurred without the knowledge, and participation, of Iraq's neighbors.
Kofi Annan made an excellent choice in appointing former U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker to head the independent panel. But let there be no illusions. Despite yesterday's Security Council vote in support of the Volcker probe, his inquiry will be as popular with the governments of Security Council members as Hercule Poirot's investigation was on the Orient Express.
The Russian Federation showed its cards when it initially opposed the resolution calling on states to cooperate with the probe. France, another of Saddam's major trading partners, displayed more finesse.
While officially welcoming the inquiry, France's ambassador to Washington sought to discredit those in the media who had campaigned for it, accusing them, in a recent Los Angeles Times op-ed, of having a "hidden agenda."
The French ambassador is correct that the Oil-for-Food scandal has been driven in large part by conservative-leaning commentators in the United States. But the facts involved are not politically slanted - they are damning.
And regardless of where observers stand on whether to assign a new role to the United Nations in Iraq, they must recognize that the United Nations cannot promote good governance internationally if it is unable to apply accountability and transparency to its own affairs. Volcker's investigation is an opportunity to do just that.
Behind closed doors, however, many U.N. diplomats continue to view the investigation as an effort by the Pentagon, and Iraqi opponents to Saddam's regime, to settle scores with Iraq's former trading partners (most of whom opposed the war and are making little effort to help rebuild Iraq today). They wonder why the kickbacks suddenly became a scandal in 2004 when everybody knew about them all along.
Well, one thing is new: Suddenly, there is a free Iraqi press that actually cares about what happened to Iraq's resources during the sanctions. It was the Iraqi daily Al-Mada that broke the story that sparked the scandal.
And if those who profited from the program feel victimized by the scandal, it might be useful for them to remember who the real victims were in this affair.
The money that was skimmed off the Oil-for-Food program was stolen from the Iraqi people. And ultimately, it will be the job of an elected Iraqi government, when it comes to power, to decide how to deal with the companies that broke the law and paid kickbacks to Saddam.
One way these companies could make amends would be to make voluntary contributions to a fund dedicated to the reconstruction of Iraq, in return for a normalization of their business relationship with the Iraqi government. Such an approach might not satisfy legal purists, but at least it would provide the Iraqi people with a positive upshot from this whole affair.
Michael Soussan, a former program coordinator for the United Nations Oil-for-Food Program, is a writer based in New York.
 World Fact Book (CIA)]
|