Everything I Know Is Wrong

Saddam Had WMD

Investors Business Daily has posted their analysis of the first tapes released of conversations Saddam had in his presidential offices.

IBD
In a tape dating to April 1995, Saddam and several aides discuss the fact that U.N. inspectors had found traces of Iraq's biological weapons program. On the tape, Hussein Kamel, Saddam's son-in-law, is heard gloating about fooling the inspectors.

"We did not reveal all that we have," he says. "Not the type of weapons, not the volume of the materials we imported, not the volume of the production we told them about, not the volume of use. None of this was correct."

There's more. Indeed, as late as 2000, Saddam can be heard in his office talking with Iraqi scientists about his ongoing plans to build a nuclear device. At one point, he discusses Iraq's plasma uranium program — something that was missed entirely by U.N. weapons inspectors combing Iraq for WMD.

This is particularly troubling, since it indicates an active, ongoing attempt by Saddam to build an Iraqi nuclear bomb.

"What was most disturbing," said John Tierney, the ex- FBI agent who translated the tapes, "was the fact that the individuals briefing Saddam were totally unknown to the U.N. Special Commission (or UNSCOM, the group set up to look into Iraq's WMD programs)."

Perhaps most chillingly, the tapes record Iraq Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz talking about how easy it would be to set off a WMD in Washington. The comments come shortly after Saddam muses about using "proxies" in a terror attack.

9-11, anyone?

The tapes show up the "Bush lied," and "there were no WMD" memes for what they have always been: empty. As for where the WMD went?

"The short answer to the question of where the WMD Saddam bought from the Russians went was that they went to Syria and Lebanon," said John Shaw, former deputy undersecretary of defense, in comments made at an intelligence summit Feb. 17-20 in Arlington, Va.

"They were moved by Russian Spetsnaz (special ops) units out of uniform that were specifically sent to Iraq to move the weaponry and eradicate any evidence of its existence," he said.

Neither revelation—not the fact that there were WMD, nor that they went to Syria—is a surprise to anyone who has followed the story with anything approaching objectivity. Here are a few post's of my own on the subject:

-This should pop the balloon belonging to the "Bush lied about WMD's" camp.
-Panetta Said Bush Did Not Lie About Intel.
-Missing the point.
-MSM finds WMD in Iraq--again.
-Democrats on WMD's.
-Saddam's WMD have been found.
-The Other Shoe.
-Syria and North Korea Sittin' in a Tree...
-Saddam Possessed WMD, Had Extensive Terror Ties
-Charles Duelfer Reports... What Exactly?

Read IBD's whole piece.

Exactly how much is "acceptable?"

Reuters
Sexual abuse charges against U.N. peacekeepers remain unacceptably high due to a persistent "culture of dismissiveness" in field missions, a U.N. diplomat said on Thursday.

It could take three to four more years for a reform program to fully take hold, Jordan's U.N. ambassador, Prince Zeid Ra'ad Zeid al-Hussein, said in updating the U.N. Security Council on how the problem was being addressed.

These are the people who want us to think that they should be entrusted with the governance of the world, and it's going to take them three to four more years to bring sexual abuse in their own organization to "acceptable" levels—whatever that means.

Sheesh.

If you choose not to respond...

John Bolton seems to be raising some hackles by pushing hard for reform at the United Nations.

AlertNet
The simmering conflict between Washington and the developing nations that make up a majority of U.N. members boiled to the surface this week when two U.S. congressmen said nonaligned states had "worked feverishly in New York to block the efforts ... to clean up the institution."

"We and our colleagues in the House of Representatives have followed, and will continue to follow, your actions very closely, and we intend to hold you accountable for them," Republican Henry Hyde of Illinois and Democrat Tom Lantos of California wrote South African Ambassador Dumisani Kumalo in a letter circulated at the United Nations on Friday.

Kumalo, chairman of a bloc of 132 developing nations and China, which is inexplicably called the Group of 77, responded by insisting that the group would... not respond.

Kumalo... said the group had been "very, very upset" by the letter but had decided at a hastily called emergency meeting not to respond to it.

He continued with his non-response.

"They [the U.S.] are just one of 191 parliaments," Kumalo said. "They were upset. We were upset. You can play that game endlessly."

Following the "endless" theme, Kumalo had still more to say in his remarkably responsive refusal to respond.

"The mistake being made by Washington is to assume management reform matters only to Washington. It matters to all of us," he told Reuters.

Perhaps, but by resisting Bolton's push for reform Kumalo makes it seem as though, to them, the thing that matters most about reform—is stopping it.

Bolton put the UN on notice.

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton has indicated just how interested the U.S. is in reform at the UN.

Reuters
The United States threatened on Tuesday to delay the two-year United Nations budget unless reforms are approved by the end of the year, a move that could cause havoc for U.N. operations.

What I really want to say is WAHOO! But that would be undignified.

"Business as usual has gotten us to the state where we need a revolution in reform and business as usual isn't going to accomplish that revolution," Bolton said.

Bolton then hinted that the UN may have out-lived its usefulness.

"Americans are a very practical people and they don't view the U.N. through theological lenses," he said. "They look at it as a competitor in the marketplace for global problem-solving and if it's successful at solving problems they'll be inclined to use it."

You gotta love the guy.

Does this mean he's going to resign?

Annan Seeks to Restore Confidence in U.N.

Well, it would be a good start...

Finally, the UN wants to enforce Resolution 1559.

The United Nations is preparing to "back up" their resolution 1559 by giving Syria a "time out."

Washington Post
A top U.N. envoy will tell President Bashar Assad that Syria will face political and economic isolation if he does not completely and quickly withdraw from Lebanon, U.N. and U.S. officials said yesterday.In a meeting set for tomorrow, Terje Roed-Larsen plans to inform Syria that the international community is united in insisting that Damascus comply with U.N. Resolution 1559 -- and is prepared to impose wide punitive sanctions if it does not act quickly, the officials said.

Expecting Syria to believe in the ability of the UN to cut them off from the world after the nearly free commerce they conducted with Iraq during the UN sanctions against Saddam, seems unrealistic. Yet a senior U.N. official insists "If he doesn't deliver, there will be total political and economic isolation of his country. There is a steel-hard consensus in the international community."

Nine votes in favor and six abstentions is hardly a steel-hard consensus; resolution 1559 is already over six months old and one can hardly believe that they would be calling for compliance, even now, were not the events in Lebanon already moving in that direction. Nevertheless, the UN is claiming the following will satisfy the conditions of 1559 and avoid sanctions:

First, Syria must honor the independent sovereignty of Lebanon and not undermine its spring elections for a new parliament. Roed-Larsen "will imprint on everybody that there is a united demand from the international community for free and fair elections" that will include international observers, the U.N. source said.

Second, Assad must provide a complete timeline for a full pullout of troops. The international community will accept "sequencing," or a phased withdrawal, but it must be expeditious, the source said.

Third, Damascus must provide a timeline for the pullout of 5,000 intelligence agents in Lebanon.

The UN's call for time-lines, and phased withdrawal, does not seem to square with resolution 1559 itself. 1559 calls for withdrawal of foreign forces, and disbanding of militias--not time-lines.

1559
1. Reaffirms its call for the strict respect of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity and political independence of Lebanon under the sole and exclusive authority of the Government of Lebanon throughout Lebanon;

2. Calls upon all remaining foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon;

3. Calls for the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias;

4. Supports the extension of the control of the Government of Lebanon over all Lebanese territory;

5. Declares its support for a free and fair electoral process in Lebanon's upcoming presidential election conducted according to Lebanese constitutional rules devised without foreign interference or influence;

6. Calls upon all parties concerned to co-operate fully and urgently with the Security Council for the full implementation of this and all relevant resolutions concerning the restoration of the territorial integrity, full sovereignty, and political independence of Lebanon;

7. Requests that the secretary general report to the Security Council within 30 days on the implementation by the parties of this resolution and decides to remain actively seized of this matter.

Having been caught red-handed profiting from the sanctions imposed on Saddam Hussein it's hard to expect anything but a profit motive from the UN measures; given their past performance enforcing compliance with their own resolutions it's difficult to believe that the involvement of the UN does anything to enhance the credibility of world pressure for Syria to leave Lebanon. True, UN involvement may bring with it the participation (at least nominally) of reluctant Europeans such as France, Germany, and Spain but the same credibility-problems-based-on-previous-performance issues obtain. They and the UN simply don't have any credibility on these issues, and the possibility exists that they may cloud the picture with their questionable steadfastness, obscuring Syria's awareness of the core of resolve that is forming in the world.

If the UN is going to insert themselves into this conflict, as they do--to little positive effect--in all world conflicts, they must demonstrate a resolve that they have as yet been unable to muster.  Gathering that resolve with a security council consisting currently of Argentina, Benin, Brazil, China, Denmark, France, Greece, Japan, Philippines, Romania, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, Tanzania, the US, and Algeria won't be easy. It may not be possible at all.

Yet, Lebanon is too important to let slip by the boards. Democracy in the Middle East would suffer a horrendus blow were Syria to be allowed to remain in Lebanon. Even the UN can see this clearly enough to give voice. But in this, as in so many other things that truly defend freedom in the world, the US may end up going it alone. I hope not, but am resigned to it.

Annan whines, it's not my fault.

Kofi Annan has an editorial in the Wall Street Journal today. He laments what he calls "attacks" on the United Nations in the media over the last year. "Attacks" are apparently what he calls it when someone points out the facts. Attacks over the way the resolutions regarding Saddam were (were not) handled; the oil-for-food scandal; "widespread cases of sexual exploitation and abuse of minors by peacekeepers and U.N. officials in the Congo and other African countries."

OpinionJournal
That pains me, because I have served the U.N. all my life. I have done, and am still doing, everything I can to correct its imperfections, and to improve and strengthen it.

By admitting that he has done, and still is doing, everything he can to improve and strengthen the UN he has put his finger exactly on the problem. Three and only three possibilities present themselves: either the UN is incapable of being reformed, or Annan is incapable of reforming them, or both.

Annan's revelation that there were "other African countries" where there are widespread cases of sexual abuse by UN personnel caught me off guard. I was not previously aware of this. It turns out that the BBC today has an article on an upcoming report from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

The unpublished report - details of which have been obtained by the BBC - covers Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea and is based on a study of more than 1,500 people interviewed over six weeks last October and November.

An unspecified number of interviewees complained that they or their children had to have sex in order to get food and favours.

Over 40 aid agencies - including the UNHCR itself - were implicated, and 67 individuals - mostly local staff - named by the children.

Some under-age girls said United Nations peacekeepers in the West African region were involved.

Most of those who said they were abused were girls under the age of 18, but the mission said it had heard from some who were much younger.

That makes Congo, Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea and who else that we don't know about yet? The UN is clearly beyond help, and Annan is clearly beyond helping. This has got to stop.

Ka-Pow!

My favorite columnist, Mark Steyn, lays "waste" to the United Nations.

Telegraph
It's a good basic axiom that if you take a quart of ice-cream and a quart of dog faeces and mix 'em together the result will taste more like the latter than the former. That's the problem with the UN. If you make the free nations and the thug states members of the same club, the danger isn't that they'll meet each other half-way but that the free world winds up going three-quarters, seven-eighths of the way. Thus the Oil-for-Fraud scandal: in the end, Saddam Hussein had a much shrewder understanding of the way the UN works than Bush and Blair did.

Don't let the dog faeces put you off, Steyn's piece is a must-read vivisection of the most corrupt organization the world.

UN Sex-for Food Scandal Goes to Next Level

The United Nations is hurtling ever faster down the slopes of decadent corruption into inevitable obscurity. The oil for food scandal proved that UN personnel were willing to take advantage of oppressed people for monetary gain. Now the Congolese sex-for-food scandal shows that, far from being the "caring" presence they claim to be, they are ready, willing, and able to mount an organized attack of the most horrible kind upon the most defenseless people in the world -- starving children.

Los Angeles Times
Explicit Photos Fan U.N. Sex Scandal.
The French staffer they implicate says that the Congo mission harbors a pedophile network.

A scandal about the sexual abuse of Congolese women and children by U.N. officials and peacekeepers intensified Friday with the broadcast of explicit pictures of a French U.N. worker and Congolese girls and his claim that there was a network of pedophiles at the U.N. mission in Congo.

ABC News' "20/20" program showed pictures taken from the computer of a French U.N. transport worker. The hard drive reportedly contained thousands of photos of him with hundreds of girls. In one frame, a tear can be seen rolling down the cheek of a victim.

The Congolese network is apparently not an isolated occurrence, but a long-standing system of organized abuse.

The staffer, Didier Bourguet, 41, is facing charges of sexual abuse and rape in France. His lawyer, Claude de Boosere- Lepidi, said in court last week that there was a network of U.N. personnel who had sex with underage girls and that Bourguet had engaged in similar activity in a previous U.N. posting in the Central African Republic.

Even after Kofi Annan instituted what he called the "zero contact" rule in Congo, 20/20 surveillance photos show a United Nations van being filled with Congolese prostitutes. The UN is clearly unable police itself; how can they be trusted to police the world.

It's way past time for them to go.

 

Oil for Food Report

Here are the reports from the IIC headed by Paul Volker:

The Independent Inquiry Committee into the United Nations Oil-for-Food Programme has today issued an Interim Report, along with a Comparison of Estimates of Illicit Iraqi Income During UN Sanctions.

---

EIKIW executive Summary of Interim Report:

Regarding the selection of contractors (Procurement):

"The investigatory record review herin is replete with convincing and uncontested evidence that the selection process for each of the three United Nations contractors selected in 1996 (namely, Banque Nationale de Paris, Saybolt Eastern Hemisphere BV, and Lloyd's Register Inspection Ltd.) did not conform to established financial and competitive bidding rules."

[..]

"The investigatory record clearly and repeatedly demonstrates that in deviating from the established financial and procurement rules, the decision-making process in 1996 for the United Nations contractors did not meet reasonable standards of fairness and transparency.

[...]

The consistent violations of prescribed procurement procedures, engaging in unfair practices, and failing to appropriately document decision-making processes, reflect  adversely on one area of the United Nations' administration.

The report's conclusion regarding contractor selection, despite being "replete with convincing and uncontested evidence," is mealy-mouthed. They offer excuses about having to come up with contractors quickly for "an urgent, complex, and unprecedented program" ; they blame "politics"; and are unable, or unwilling, to ascribe motivation for the transgressions.

Regarding Benon Sevan and Oil Allocations (read: "bribes"):

"The committee concludes that Mr. Sevan, while employed as Executive Director of OIP, solicited and received on behalf of AEMP several million barrels of allocations of oil from 1998 to 2001, As a result of Mr. Sevan's conduct, AEMP's revenue--net bank fees and surcharge payment--totaled approximately $1.5 million.

[...]

The Committee finds also that Mr. Sevan's solicitations on behalf of AEMP and AEMP's resulting purchases of oil presented a grave and continuing conflict of interest, were ethically improper, and seriously undermined the integrity of the United Nations.

The report also concludes that Sevan's story about having gotten large sums of money "from his elderly aunt (now deceased)" didn't hold water. Even so they put off recommendations for action until further reports are issued.

EIKIW executive Summary of Comparison of Estimates: There was over $21 billion of illicit Iraqi (read: Saddam) income.

EIKIW overall analysis: These two reports combined are very nearly useless. They told us virtually nothing that we did not already know. Where we knew that Saddam had about $21 billion in illegal revenue from Oil for Food, we now know, if we can rely on the figures, that there was $21.149 billion. Hardly an advance in our knowledge.

Kofi Annon's name is mentioned only eight times in the report, only two of those were in the body text (pages 64, 157). On page 64 his name was mentioned to clearly establish when he turned over administration of Oil for Food to OIP. On page 157 he was listed as a participant in a meeting. All the rest are in footnotes, tables of contents, lists of officers, or in relation to his son Kojo.

Annan's son, and his connections to Cotecna,  were mentioned, primarily, to say that they would not be mentioned in this report. We'll have to wait for another report; it's still in the works.

There were no recommendations made regarding Sevan.

This report was materially empty. Competent reporters like Claudia Rosette told us all of this and more, months ago. Making us wait even longer for reports which might, or might not, contain actual information amounts to nothing less than stalling. This is a whitewash.

Click "continue reading" if you want to read Annan's comments about the report. Can't say I recommend it; they're pretty empty, too.

Update: Instapundit points out a couple of blogs that draw similar conclusions.

Decision '08
Oil for Food, Part Eleven: This Song Sounds Familiar
The scenario: conservative journalists and bloggers throw a spotlight on a scandal the MSM would just as soon forget. The blistering criticism forces the organization implicated to sanction an independent investigation. As the time for the findings of the investigation nears, the conservatives begin to fear a whitewash. Finally, the report is released, and is quite damning in the individual details, but too tame in the conclusions drawn.

Austin Bay
The Volcker investigation –for the moment– slides around Kofi Annan. It does not go to the most dicey and potentially ugly strategic issue: corruption in the Security Council.