Oil-for-food scandal is outrageous

October 31, 2005
The Daily Oklahoman Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News
Original Source: http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/news/editorial/13047242.htm

Breathtaking is a word that quickly comes to mind in the wake of the latest news from the inquiry into the United Nations' oil-for-food program -- that more than 2,000 companies paid nearly $2 billion in illicit payments to the regime of Saddam Hussein to win program contracts.
A report last week from the investigation headed by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker says Russian and French firms dominated the list of companies that paid kickbacks and sham fees to Saddam's government under the program that was designed to let Iraq use oil profits to buy food, medicine and other humanitarian supplies.
The 623-page report suggests more than half the companies that participated in oil-for-food helped Saddam undermine international sanctions on Iraq by supplying the regime with a ready source of income. John Bolton, the United States ambassador to the U.N., said the report shows how Saddam could divert billions of dollars to his personal use and that it couldn't have happened without the willing cooperation of U.N. officials (and) the acquiescence of some member states.
According to the report, companies with dirty hands include DaimlerChrysler AG, Siemens AG and Volvo's construction vehicle unit. Only a handful of U.S. firms were named.
The report also implicates a variety of politicians including British parliament member George Galloway and Russian ultranationalist Vladimir Zhirinovsky. Corruption reached levels of all kinds. A Vatican priest who campaigned against the Iraq sanctions received a $140,000 contribution from a French oil importer, the report says.
For some time we've said the emerging sordid details of the scandal offered a plausible explanation for the resistance of some on the Security Council to take a harder line on Iraq and, ultimately, to oppose military intervention. With French and Russian companies in Saddam's pocket, it's reasonable to think the policies of the respective governments were influenced.
Also underscored, again, is the role U.N. officials played, or in some cases, didn't play, in managing the program. Investigators found that by 2000, gatekeepers of the program, the (U.N.) Secretariat, the Security Council and the U.N. contractors failed most grievously in their responsibilities to monitor the program's integrity. Still, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said close aides implicated in the scandal wouldn't be fired or disciplined.
That's unfortunate. While the latest Volcker report adds to a mounting pile of evidence demanding major reform, it's hard to see how much will change within the U.N.'s culture without dealing with those who presided over -- and perhaps profited from -- one of the greatest fiascoes in the world body's history.