i don't understand why conservatives get so excited about this iraq oil-for-food scandal. i realize it's a big deal, there's a lot of money involved. but corruption in the oil-for-food program is not exactly a new story. sleezy stories have been coming out of that program pretty much since its inception in the early 1990s. they easily pre-date annan's tenure as secretary general. and yet, as i occasionally skim through some of the writings of the other side, you would think that annan himself was both the mastermind and chief beneficiary.
admittedly, i haven't followed the recent twists and turns in the story all that closely. but i do know that a lot of diverse parties are potentially implicated--including close allies and some americans too. instead, the right seems to be using the scandal as an opportunity for score-settling--using it to go after annan (who vocally opposed the iraq war--like most of humanity, if you want to be technical about it), and france (ditto). france is a particularly interesting case. critics of france's role point to the duelfer report (a report commissioned by the bush administration) which named several french companies which profited from corruption in the UN program.
first, take a moment to consider this. the report implicates french companies, not the french government itself, in the scandal. got that? apparently, not everyone understands that part. okay, i'll move on.
the duelfer report also states that several u.s. companies and individual americans also profited from illegal iraqi oil sales, unlike the french companies however, the report did not name names of the americans because they are protected by u.s. privacy laws. under those circumstances, it's not surprising that the french government protested the duelfer report. can you honestly say we would have done any different if circumstances were reversed?
the names of some of the u.s. companies have leaked out. and yet, having u.s. companies involved is not seen by france's critics as reason to condemn the u.s. . indeed, one of the american companies that is possibly implicated is haliburton and at the time of the alleged illegal activities cheney was CEO. unlike the situation with france, you can argue that at least one current member of the american government is implicated in the scandal.
maybe i'm missing something. as i said, i haven't read everything there is on this issue. but when i see all these overheated france-propped-up-saddam rants or when i hear about republican senators demanding annan's resignation, i just have a hard time taking them seriously.
feel free to tell me what i am missing here.
