Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Iraq, le mani sporche di Kofi Annan, Chirac e Putin

lunedì, 29 marzo 2004
Iraq, le mani sporche di Kofi Annan, Chirac e Putin
5 miliardi di dollari di tangenti da imprese francesi e russe nelle tasche
di Saddam...e del figlio di Kofi Annan (segretario generale dell'Onu). Tutti
soldi dirottati dal programma "oil for food", cioè destinati ai bambini
iracheni che morivano di fame e di malattie. Con la complicità di una banca
francese, la Bnp Paribas, a cui l'Onu aveva dato la gestione esclusiva dei
pagamenti. C'è di che rivedere i nobili motivi che spinsero la Francia e la
Russia ad opporsi all'intervento militare contro Saddam. C'è di che far
saltare Kofi Annan. Perchè questo maxiscandalo, su cui l'Onu è stata
costretta ad aprire un'inchiesta interna, rimane semi-clandestino? Secondo
l'autorevole columnist repubblicano William Safire, lo stesso Bush non ha
interesse a destabilizzare il Palazzo di Vetro in questa fase in cui
l'America e l'Europa cercano una copertura Onu in Iraq. E se invece gli
americani, in cambio della loro sorprendente discrezione, stessero
semplicemente ricattando Kofi Annan dopo averlo scoperto con le mani nel
sacco? (William Safire, "Follow Up to Kofigate", 
http://www.nyt.com
 )
Dal Blog di Repubblica.it Estremo occidente di Federico Rampini
http://blog.repubblica.it/rblog/page/FRampini/20040329#20040389091159
OP-ED COLUMNIST
Follow-Up to Kofigate
By WILLIAM SAFIRE
Published: March 29, 2004
WASHINGTON — Never has there been a financial rip-off of the magnitude of
the U.N. oil-for-food scandal.
At least $5 billion in kickbacks went from corrupt contractors — mainly
French and Russian — into the pockets of Saddam and his thugs. Some went to
pay off his protectors in foreign governments and media, and we may soon see
how much stuck to the fingers of U.N. bureaucrats as well.
Responding to a harangue in this space on March 17, the spokesman for Kofi
Annan confirmed that the secretary general's soft-spoken son, Kojo, was on
the payroll of Cotecna Inspections of Switzerland until December 1998. In
that very month, the U.N. awarded Cotecna the contract to monitor and
authenticate the goods shipped to Iraq.
Prices were inflated to allow for 10 percent kickbacks, and the goods were
often shoddy and unusable. As the lax Cotecna made a lot of corporate
friends, Iraqi children suffered from rotted food and diluted medicines.
The U.N. press agent also revealed that Benon Sevan, Annan's longtime
right-hand man in charge of the flow of billions, was advised by U.N.
lawyers that the names of companies receiving the contracts were "privileged
commercial information, which could not be made public." Mr. Sevan had
stonewalling help.
To shift responsibility for the see-no-evil oversight, the U.N. spokesman
noted that "details of all contracts were made available to the governments
of all 15 Security Council members." All the details, including the regular
10 percent kickback to the tune of $5 billion in illegal surcharges? We'll
see.
To calm the belated uproar, Annan felt compelled to seek an "independent
high-level inquiry," empowered by a Security Council resolution, as some of
us called for.
Nothing doing, said France's U.N. ambassador, Jean-Marc de la Sablière. The
money for the huge heist known as the Iraq-U.N. account passed exclusively
through BNP Paribas. French companies led all the rest (what's French for
"kickback"?), though Vladimir Putin's favorite Russian oligarchs insisted on
sharing the wealth. That explains why Paris and Moscow were Saddam's main
prewar defenders, and why their politicians and executives now want no
inquiry they cannot control.
Nor are the White House and State Department so eager for a real
investigation, because as the truth emerges, the U.N. may use the furor as
cover for refusal to confer its blessing on the new Iraq. Our present and
former U.S. ambassadors to the U.N. would have to take issue with Annan if
he tried to hide under their wing. Peter Burleigh and Andrew Hillman, our
frequent representatives on the "661 committee" — so named for a sanctions
resolution — are not about to be the U.N.'s scapegoats.
If the secretary general appoints a Franco-Russian Whitewash Team, to whom
can the world turn?
1. The Iraqi government-in-formation. Spurred by Kurds who have been blowing
the whistle on this superscam for five years, free Iraq has hired
accountants and lawyers to sift through captured bills and contracts in
Baghdad. Former spooks are freelancing usefully. Paul Bremer, our man in
Baghdad, has placed a trove of additional half-corrupted tapes and damaged
and damaging documents under seal to be turned over after June 30,
Sovereignty Day.
2. The House International Relations Committee's chairman, Henry Hyde, whose
interviewers are in New York today, will hold initial hearings on April 21.
Congress's investigative arm, the General Accounting Office, will testify
about the scope of the chicanery that it estimates at $10 billion (including
Saddam's clandestine oil smuggling to Syria and Jordan). It's a start that
should awaken Senate Foreign Relations as well as Justice.
3. The press, stimulated by U.N. stonewalling, is on the trail.
Al Mada led the way. Already denying the feisty Iraq newspaper's findings
are a former French interior minister, a pro-Saddam member of Britain's
Parliament, Arab writers and a financier reportedly behind a Scott Ritter
film. The Times, Wall Street Journal and Sunday Telegraph have been exposing
the outline of what Newsday admits is "the most underreported story of the
year." Among magazines, National Review is out front with no interest shown
by The New Yorker and Newsweek.
All of us need an embittered whistleblower. If an ex-U.N. type named Shaukat
Fareed reads this — call me.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/29/opinion/29SAFI.html