Tweet
Washington Times, DC
Feb 9 2005
Outside View: What 'Oil-for-Food' scandal?
By Youssef M. Ibrahim
Outside View Commentator
Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Feb. 9 (UPI) -- The oil-for-food scandal
is proving to be less of an embarrassment to the United Nations than
to those who built it up as the mother of all fiscal scandals and
reason enough to brand the U.N.
Following the first pronouncement last Tuesday on an ongoing
investigation into the program that was designed by the U.N. Security
Council to feed Iraqis in the years of sanctions, U.N. bashers now
find themselves holding a pretty thin sheet of evidence.
A so-called interim report by Paul Volcker -- former head of
America's central bank, known as the Federal Reserve, or "Fed" -- was
notable for its failure in finding a smoking gun anywhere near U.N.
Secretary-General Kofi Annan. It merely concluded that the principal
of the case, former director of the oil-for-food program, the
Armenian Cypriot Benon Sevan, behaved in an "improper'' way!
Following a year of investigation by 60 investigators at a cost, so
far, of $35 million, and hints of embezzlements in the billions of
dollars by scores of people, may we be permitted to ask: That's it?
The nature and scope of this much-ballyhooed scandal were phenomenal.
Money was siphoned away from the mouths of Iraqi children and Iraqi
oil revenues. Sevan was supposed to have connived with former Iraqi
president Saddam Hussein, select groups of oil dealers and
well-placed politicians in world governments to create billions in
slush funds and receive Saddam's gifts of discounted oil contracts.
So far what Volcker came up with is pretty limp, not even rising to
the level of wide currency among an American press corps being
content to exist on leaks from a U.S. administration known for its
animus toward all things multinational.
Where are the supposed billions supposedly re-routed via private
banks and corrupt politicians worldwide? Which banks? The numbers
only began at $2 billion going up by multiples according to printed
accounts on the leak-of-the-day.
As it turned out, Volcker's 60 snoops found little beyond their
suspicions that Sevan used his influence with Iraq "improperly."
As for the larger conspiracy, they can only point at one rather small
oil trading company in Geneva as having gained access to only two
modest-size contracts of Iraqi crude oil shipments.
Sevan was said to have prompted the United Nations to provide greater
help in rebuilding Iraq's oil equipment. That's an odd charge, for it
was the man's job to revive Iraq's revenues from oil so as to import
more food -- Saddam or no Saddam.
When it came to corruption, the Volcker vultures ''hinted'' Sevan's
aunt could have been a conduit for bribes. Why? She left him an
inheritance of $160,000! Not exactly a king's ransom. Altogether,
what was supposed to be a major heist is not a Thomas Crown Affair.
Never fans of the United Nations, George W. Bush and his
neoconservative minions who have fanned the fires of the oil-for-food
scandal, appear to be using this deflated balloon to blackmail,
paralyze and marginalize a multinational organization that has been a
thorn in their side.
To be sure, Annan, should have accepted blame for improprieties that
happened under his watch, spared the United Nations a witch-hunt and
quit.
He did not. But that is certainly not a reason to brand the United
Nations a broken institution and hint that its present leader, as
well as his predecessor -- Boutros Boutros Ghali, whose name was
dropped into the interim report without a valid reason -- are
corrupt. It is typical of neoconservatives: murder by innuendo.
Graver than exaggerations are omissions. As the New York Times'
editorial pointed out, Volcker's incomplete mid-term report has yet
to tackle how members of the U.N. Security Council looked the other
way.
The lone oil-trader, who supposedly was the linchpin in the huge
scandal, it turns out, only picked up two small contracts of Iraqi
oil sales, according to the interim report, before dropping out as
the deal looked unprofitable. But better than 99 percent of Iraq's
oil smuggling moved outside the purview of U.N. supervision, going
through international borders.
Buyers included world-class oil companies with American, British,
Chinese, Russian and French pedigree. This daily illegal oil export
estimated at a half-million barrels of oil went out via two of
America's major allies, Turkey and Jordan, as well as through Iran
and Syria, all of which have had commercial ties with Iraq and
pipelines over the ground or under.
The U.N. Security Council, including the United States, looked the
other way. Instead the Volcker interim report stopped at picking on a
U.N. official and a lone oil trader in Geneva
There is more. Quantities of oil cited in the interim report as the
subject of the United Nation's dubious dealings amount to 0.1825
percent of all Iraqi oil exports, estimated at 4 billion barrels over
the period of the accusation, a statistical irrelevance in the world
of oil.
Could it be that the animus that has developed toward Annan by the
Bush administration is behind the spin?
After all, the secretary general had the nerve to declare the
invasion of Iraq an "illegal war" and denounce the scandalous torture
practices against Iraqis at Abu Ghraib prison.
The president of the United States is an oil businessman-millionaire
who knows that this is, oil-wise, a charade. So does the former head
of America's central bank, Volcker. Gents, give us a break.
--
Youssef M. Ibrahim, a former Middle East correspondent for the New
York Times and Energy Editor of the Wall Street Journal, is Managing
Director of the Dubai-based Strategic Energy Investment Group. He can
be contacted at [email protected]
--
This essay first appeared in Gulf News.
Feb 9 2005
Outside View: What 'Oil-for-Food' scandal?
By Youssef M. Ibrahim
Outside View Commentator
Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Feb. 9 (UPI) -- The oil-for-food scandal
is proving to be less of an embarrassment to the United Nations than
to those who built it up as the mother of all fiscal scandals and
reason enough to brand the U.N.
Following the first pronouncement last Tuesday on an ongoing
investigation into the program that was designed by the U.N. Security
Council to feed Iraqis in the years of sanctions, U.N. bashers now
find themselves holding a pretty thin sheet of evidence.
A so-called interim report by Paul Volcker -- former head of
America's central bank, known as the Federal Reserve, or "Fed" -- was
notable for its failure in finding a smoking gun anywhere near U.N.
Secretary-General Kofi Annan. It merely concluded that the principal
of the case, former director of the oil-for-food program, the
Armenian Cypriot Benon Sevan, behaved in an "improper'' way!
Following a year of investigation by 60 investigators at a cost, so
far, of $35 million, and hints of embezzlements in the billions of
dollars by scores of people, may we be permitted to ask: That's it?
The nature and scope of this much-ballyhooed scandal were phenomenal.
Money was siphoned away from the mouths of Iraqi children and Iraqi
oil revenues. Sevan was supposed to have connived with former Iraqi
president Saddam Hussein, select groups of oil dealers and
well-placed politicians in world governments to create billions in
slush funds and receive Saddam's gifts of discounted oil contracts.
So far what Volcker came up with is pretty limp, not even rising to
the level of wide currency among an American press corps being
content to exist on leaks from a U.S. administration known for its
animus toward all things multinational.
Where are the supposed billions supposedly re-routed via private
banks and corrupt politicians worldwide? Which banks? The numbers
only began at $2 billion going up by multiples according to printed
accounts on the leak-of-the-day.
As it turned out, Volcker's 60 snoops found little beyond their
suspicions that Sevan used his influence with Iraq "improperly."
As for the larger conspiracy, they can only point at one rather small
oil trading company in Geneva as having gained access to only two
modest-size contracts of Iraqi crude oil shipments.
Sevan was said to have prompted the United Nations to provide greater
help in rebuilding Iraq's oil equipment. That's an odd charge, for it
was the man's job to revive Iraq's revenues from oil so as to import
more food -- Saddam or no Saddam.
When it came to corruption, the Volcker vultures ''hinted'' Sevan's
aunt could have been a conduit for bribes. Why? She left him an
inheritance of $160,000! Not exactly a king's ransom. Altogether,
what was supposed to be a major heist is not a Thomas Crown Affair.
Never fans of the United Nations, George W. Bush and his
neoconservative minions who have fanned the fires of the oil-for-food
scandal, appear to be using this deflated balloon to blackmail,
paralyze and marginalize a multinational organization that has been a
thorn in their side.
To be sure, Annan, should have accepted blame for improprieties that
happened under his watch, spared the United Nations a witch-hunt and
quit.
He did not. But that is certainly not a reason to brand the United
Nations a broken institution and hint that its present leader, as
well as his predecessor -- Boutros Boutros Ghali, whose name was
dropped into the interim report without a valid reason -- are
corrupt. It is typical of neoconservatives: murder by innuendo.
Graver than exaggerations are omissions. As the New York Times'
editorial pointed out, Volcker's incomplete mid-term report has yet
to tackle how members of the U.N. Security Council looked the other
way.
The lone oil-trader, who supposedly was the linchpin in the huge
scandal, it turns out, only picked up two small contracts of Iraqi
oil sales, according to the interim report, before dropping out as
the deal looked unprofitable. But better than 99 percent of Iraq's
oil smuggling moved outside the purview of U.N. supervision, going
through international borders.
Buyers included world-class oil companies with American, British,
Chinese, Russian and French pedigree. This daily illegal oil export
estimated at a half-million barrels of oil went out via two of
America's major allies, Turkey and Jordan, as well as through Iran
and Syria, all of which have had commercial ties with Iraq and
pipelines over the ground or under.
The U.N. Security Council, including the United States, looked the
other way. Instead the Volcker interim report stopped at picking on a
U.N. official and a lone oil trader in Geneva
There is more. Quantities of oil cited in the interim report as the
subject of the United Nation's dubious dealings amount to 0.1825
percent of all Iraqi oil exports, estimated at 4 billion barrels over
the period of the accusation, a statistical irrelevance in the world
of oil.
Could it be that the animus that has developed toward Annan by the
Bush administration is behind the spin?
After all, the secretary general had the nerve to declare the
invasion of Iraq an "illegal war" and denounce the scandalous torture
practices against Iraqis at Abu Ghraib prison.
The president of the United States is an oil businessman-millionaire
who knows that this is, oil-wise, a charade. So does the former head
of America's central bank, Volcker. Gents, give us a break.
--
Youssef M. Ibrahim, a former Middle East correspondent for the New
York Times and Energy Editor of the Wall Street Journal, is Managing
Director of the Dubai-based Strategic Energy Investment Group. He can
be contacted at [email protected]
--
This essay first appeared in Gulf News.