Should USA point fingers?
Dec 08, 2004
THE soft-spoken UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, has been receiving the unworthy attention of the fundamentalists and some liberals in the United States. The reason for shooting arrows at Annan are the revelations from US investigations into the Iraqi Oil for Food Programme.
THE soft-spoken UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, has been receiving the unworthy attention of the fundamentalists and some liberals in the United States. The reason for shooting arrows at Annan are the revelations from US investigations into the Iraqi Oil for Food Programme.
Some of the allegations are corruption, diversion of food money into private coffers, fraudulent contracts and all manners of under-hand activities by individuals and companies (mostly Western) and others involved.
These allegations are not earth-shattering, given the US mishandling of the Iraqi economy, society and its vital oil resources since the occupation of the country. US companies like Halliburton of vice-president Dick Cheney are accused of similar practices. So why is the US so much interested in investigating the UN in Iraq without allowing any censure of its own illegal activities in that country? Even Western humanitarian agencies that often keep their mouth shut about Western governments were outraged and demanded accountability from the US proconsul for Iraq, Paul Bremmer, before he handed over to their crony, Iyad Allawi and other US puppets in the interim government of Iraq.
Both Bremmer and the Bush administration treated that request with contempt because they are above the standards of the public probity they demand of everybody else especially those they do not like. Since the US demands accountability from anybody who dares demand accountability from it and its chosen agents, this is why they have given themselves the power to act as the global law enforcer, but exempt themselves from the international criminal court. They can fight wars on behalf of the UN but are not bound by UN procedures or resolutions.
The double standard stinks. The attack on the UN has taken an ironical personal turn for Annan. His son is alleged to have worked for and received payments from one of the companies accused of being involved in the Iraqi gravy train. And because of this Anan’s persecutors are demanding that Kofi Annan should resign. He should be punished for a yet to be proven criminal act by his son. Yet nobody has demanded the resignation of Bush for allowing the US to be attacked by not concentrating on his watch. The fact that his family has a long history of juicy business relationship with the Bin Laden family and the obvious conflicts of interest in that was never an issue for US voters who returned Bush to power. The Enron and Halliburton scandals and the personal involvement of senior administration officials, Republican financiers and other supporters have not led to any resignations in the US government. So why are they calling for Annan’s head?
The reason is not difficult to see. Kofi Annan, like Boutros Boutros-Ghali before him, both of them pro-American when they started out, discovers that the credibility of the UN and himself demands being able to stand up to the bullies in the US who see the UN as an after-sales service for American adventures. They hounded Boutros-Ghali out of office when he began to resist US brazen abuse of the UN system and contempt for multilateral solutions.
At that time Annan was
presented as the ‘safe pair of hands’, ‘moderate’, ‘sensible’ and all the other superlatives used to dress up being ‘a house Nigger’. And he seemed to play ball for many years but over Iraq he began to grumble which became much open during and after the last UN General Assembly when he declared the war against Iraq and the Anglo-American occupation of that country as illegal. Consequently, the Bush administration and their screaming loony sects decree an end to his term. Some of the criticisms they are making of Annan today were the same ones many who had opposed his candidacy in 1997 had which did not matter to the US then. For me, the biggest stain in his dull bureaucratic career at the UN remains inaction over genocide in Rwanda. But this did not matter then. So why now? The answer is simple: Annan is now tired of being a ‘house Nigger’. For talking back to his masters, they want to banish him from the palace.
It is yet another abject lesson for those Africans or other developing world peoples who always want to play it safe and be on the right side of the big powers. You are nothing but a disposable towel to them. You are not any special friend but a convenient tool for some time and they will get rid of you when you are no longer of service.
A defence of Kofi Annan
and the UN is a correct thing to do today, because those calling for his head and
bashing the UN are more dangerous to our world
than the mild-mannered, international civil servant.
It is not an endorsement
of all Annan/UN did or did not do but an expression
of hope that together the whole world can make the UN to be of better service
to humanity.
Ends
Some of the allegations are corruption, diversion of food money into private coffers, fraudulent contracts and all manners of under-hand activities by individuals and companies (mostly Western) and others involved.
These allegations are not earth-shattering, given the US mishandling of the Iraqi economy, society and its vital oil resources since the occupation of the country. US companies like Halliburton of vice-president Dick Cheney are accused of similar practices. So why is the US so much interested in investigating the UN in Iraq without allowing any censure of its own illegal activities in that country? Even Western humanitarian agencies that often keep their mouth shut about Western governments were outraged and demanded accountability from the US proconsul for Iraq, Paul Bremmer, before he handed over to their crony, Iyad Allawi and other US puppets in the interim government of Iraq.
Both Bremmer and the Bush administration treated that request with contempt because they are above the standards of the public probity they demand of everybody else especially those they do not like. Since the US demands accountability from anybody who dares demand accountability from it and its chosen agents, this is why they have given themselves the power to act as the global law enforcer, but exempt themselves from the international criminal court. They can fight wars on behalf of the UN but are not bound by UN procedures or resolutions.
The double standard stinks. The attack on the UN has taken an ironical personal turn for Annan. His son is alleged to have worked for and received payments from one of the companies accused of being involved in the Iraqi gravy train. And because of this Anan’s persecutors are demanding that Kofi Annan should resign. He should be punished for a yet to be proven criminal act by his son. Yet nobody has demanded the resignation of Bush for allowing the US to be attacked by not concentrating on his watch. The fact that his family has a long history of juicy business relationship with the Bin Laden family and the obvious conflicts of interest in that was never an issue for US voters who returned Bush to power. The Enron and Halliburton scandals and the personal involvement of senior administration officials, Republican financiers and other supporters have not led to any resignations in the US government. So why are they calling for Annan’s head?
The reason is not difficult to see. Kofi Annan, like Boutros Boutros-Ghali before him, both of them pro-American when they started out, discovers that the credibility of the UN and himself demands being able to stand up to the bullies in the US who see the UN as an after-sales service for American adventures. They hounded Boutros-Ghali out of office when he began to resist US brazen abuse of the UN system and contempt for multilateral solutions.
At that time Annan was
presented as the ‘safe pair of hands’, ‘moderate’, ‘sensible’ and all the other superlatives used to dress up being ‘a house Nigger’. And he seemed to play ball for many years but over Iraq he began to grumble which became much open during and after the last UN General Assembly when he declared the war against Iraq and the Anglo-American occupation of that country as illegal. Consequently, the Bush administration and their screaming loony sects decree an end to his term. Some of the criticisms they are making of Annan today were the same ones many who had opposed his candidacy in 1997 had which did not matter to the US then. For me, the biggest stain in his dull bureaucratic career at the UN remains inaction over genocide in Rwanda. But this did not matter then. So why now? The answer is simple: Annan is now tired of being a ‘house Nigger’. For talking back to his masters, they want to banish him from the palace.
It is yet another abject lesson for those Africans or other developing world peoples who always want to play it safe and be on the right side of the big powers. You are nothing but a disposable towel to them. You are not any special friend but a convenient tool for some time and they will get rid of you when you are no longer of service.
A defence of Kofi Annan
and the UN is a correct thing to do today, because those calling for his head and
bashing the UN are more dangerous to our world
than the mild-mannered, international civil servant.
It is not an endorsement
of all Annan/UN did or did not do but an expression
of hope that together the whole world can make the UN to be of better service
to humanity.
Ends