Cover Story
 |
| Photo: Cover of the Western Standard |
How the biggest scandal in history unfolded
- Aug. 2, 1990–Iraq invades Kuwait.
- Aug. 9, 1990–UN international trade embargo imposed on Iraq.
- Jan. 17, 1991–U.S. attacks Iraq.
- April 6, 1991–Cease fire.
- Aug. 15, 1991–First Oil-for-Food plan rejected by Iraq.
- April 15, 1995–UN submits to demands by Saddam Hussein that Iraq be allowed to export US$2 billion of oil every six months.
- Dec. 10, 1996–First Iraqi oil exports begin under
Oil-for-Food. BNP is shortlisted by Iraq and selected by the UN as the
bank to handle the escrow account.
- Feb. 1, 1998–UN Secretary General Kofi Annan urges Security Council to double the amount of oil Saddam is allowed to sell.
- Feb. 20, 1998–UN raises Iraq’s oil export ceiling to US$5.256 billion per six months.
- Feb. 23, 1998–Annan reaches agreement with Saddam allowing weapons inspectors.
- December 1998–UN awards contract to Cotecna to authenticate
the goods shipped to Iraq. Kojo Annan, Kofi’s son, is on Cotecna’s
payroll. December 1998–UN orders weapons inspectors out of Iraq,
claiming Saddam not co-operating.
- November 1999–U.S. holds up supply contracts to Iraq over concerns that Saddam is receiving kickbacks.
- Dec. 17, 1999–UN sends new weapons inspectors to Iraq and abolishes export limit on Iraqi oil.
- February 2000–U.S. accuses Iraq of using Oil-for-Food revenues to build nine palaces and import cigarettes and liquor.
- March 31, 2000–UN doubles value of oil industry equipment that Iraq can import.
- December 2000–Iraqi Oil Ministry introduces a surcharge of
25—30 cents per barrel. Oil sales drop by more than half as major oil
traders balk at paying what they consider kickbacks. Hundreds of
middlemen move in. "Every man and his dog is buying Iraqi oil," remarks
one trader in January 2001.
- March 2001–U.S. and U.K. ask UN sanctions committee to cut the
list of more than 600 operators approved by the UN to purchase Iraqi
oil in order to eliminate kickbacks.
- June 2002–Iraq drops the surcharge on oil.
- August 2002–Oil-for-Food head Benon Sevan raises "grave concern" over Iraq’s export shortfall and blames retroactive pricing.
- March 19, 2003–America invades Iraq.
- March 24, 2003–Bush Administration begins process
- of easing Iraqi sanctions.
- March 28, 2003–UN restarts Oil-for-Food, empowering it to take more direct control for 45 days.
- March 29, 2003–New York Post snaps photos of the Iraqi
ambassador to UN, Mohammed al-Douri, dining at a restaurant with Benon
Sevan.
- Early April 2003–Baath regime falls. Sevan says relief supplies are insufficient to meet emergency needs in Iraq.
- Late April 2003: UN Security Council members France, Russia
and China–which hold about three-quarters of the Oil-for-Food
contracts–press to keep the aid program going.
- Sept. 29, 2003–Sevan reports that the pullout of the UN
Oil-for-Food program has been hindered by August bombing of the UN’s
Baghdad office.
- Nov. 21, 2003–Oil-for-Food officially ends.
- January 2004–270 names published in Iraqi newspaper of
politicians and businessmen who received vouchers to buy Iraqi oil at
below-market prices. Sevan’s name is on the list.
- Mar. 18, 2004–Congress’s General Accounting Office releases
preliminary report estimating Saddam personally stole US$10.1 billion
from UN Oil-for-Food program.
- March 2004–UN announces Office of Internal Oversight Services will investigate Oil-for-Food.
- April 2004–Former Federal Reserve head Paul Volcker appointed by Annan to investigate Oil-for-Food.
- March 2004–General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of
the U.S. Congress, doubles to $10 billion its estimate of alleged theft
and illegal oil smuggling from the UN Oil-for-Food program.
- April 28, 2004–House International Relations Committee begins hearings into Oil-for-Food.
- Nov. 15, 2004–Senate permanent subcommittee on investigations holds first hearing on Oil-for-Food.
- Jan. 10, 2005–Volcker releases 58 internal UN audits showing
widespread mismanagement in the UN and corruption possibly extending
beyond Oil-for-Food.
- Jan. 27, 2005–Congressional subcommittee on oversight and investigations created to separately probe Oil-for-Food scandal.
- Feb. 3, 2005–UN investigation issues interim report. Sevan and
another UN employee are suspended for possibly accepting bribes from
Saddam’s regime.
|
 | | Former
head of Power Corp., Paul Desmarais (centre), and his two sons, André
(left), company president, and Paul Jr. (right), company CEO. |
Other Oil for food Stories
|
How Montreal's Power Corp. found itself caught up in the biggest fiasco in UN history
by Kevin Steel, The Western Standard
Saturday, March 5, 2005
Most Canadian companies look forward to the day they
earn themselves a mention on the prime-time news. They hire PR firms
and spend thousands to harass news
editors with press releases to tout their latest
acquisition, invention or foreign venture in hopes of convincing
someone to give them even a passing mention on the national news–never
mind the nearly unimaginable publicity of being plugged on a U.S.
newscast.
But when Montreal-based Power Corporation of Canada
found itself, in late January, the topic of a news story on America’s
top-rated Fox News Channel, which draws millions of U.S. and
international viewers, executives there probably weren’t thrilled.
Unlike most publicly traded firms looking to build their brand on Wall
Street, Power Corp. is, at the best of times, a quiet, often obscured
company (in the past year it’s issued a total of five news releases).
That might seem strange, given the massive size and, well, power
wielded by the holding company. Power controls some of Canada’s biggest
blue-chip companies, including the Investors Group, the country’s
largest mutual fund dealer, and investment firm Mackenzie Financial. It
owns insurers Great-West Lifeco, Canada Life and London Life. Power
owns several Quebec newspapers, including La Presse. It also holds
substantial positions in Chinese airlines and telecom firms and has
large stakes in the world’s leading entertainment company, Bertelsmann,
as well as a big piece of one of Europe’s largest oil producers. In
2003, Power Corp. reported annual revenues of $16 billion.
But the Fox News story wasn’t prompted by an
announcement from Power of some billion-dollar takeover or the
appointment of a new senior executive. It was something altogether
different: the revelation that the man handpicked by the UN secretary
general last April to probe the UN’s scandalized Oil-for-Food program,
Paul Volcker, had not disclosed to the UN that he was a paid adviser to
Power Corp., a story which had originally been broken by a small,
independent Toronto newspaper, the Canada Free Press. Why did
the highest-rated cable channel in the U.S. care? Because the more that
Americans came to know about Oil-for-Food, which has been called the
largest corruption scandal in history, the more the name of this
little-known Montreal firm kept popping up. And the more links that
seemed to emerge between Power Corp. and individuals or organizations
involved in the Oil-for-Food scandal, the more Fox News and other news
outlets sniffing around this story began to ask questions about who,
exactly, this Power Corp. is. And, they wanted to know, what, if
anything, did Power have to do with a scandal in which companies around
the world took bribes to help a murderous dictator scam billions of
dollars in humanitarian aid out of the UN while his people suffered and
starved?
Just a month before the Canada Free Press
revealed that Volcker, a former Federal Reserve chairman, is a member
of Power Corp.’s international advisory board–and a close friend and
personal adviser to Power’s owner, Paul Desmarais Sr.–a U.S.
congressional investigation into the UN scandal discovered that Power
Corp. had extensive connections to BNP Paribas, a French bank that had
been handpicked by the UN in 1996 to broker the Oil-for-Food program.
In fact, Power actually once owned a stake in Paribas through its
subsidiary, Pargesa Holding SA. The bank also purchased a stake in
Power Corp. in the mid-seventies and, as recently as 2003, BNP Paribas
had a 14.7 per cent equity and 21.3 per cent voting stake in Pargesa,
company records show. John Rae, a director and former executive at
Power (brother of former Ontario premier Bob Rae), was president and a
director of the Paribas Bank of Canada until 2000. And Power Corp.
director Michel François-Poncet, who was, in 2001, the vice-chairman of
Pargesa, also sat on Paribas’s board, though he died Feb. 10, at the
age of 70. A former chair of Paribas’s management board, André
Levy-Lang, is currently a member of Power’s international advisory
council. And Amaury-Daniel de Seze, a member of BNP Paribas’s executive
council, also sat on Pargesa’s administrative council in 2002.
 |
In September, the U.S. Congress–conducting one of seven
U.S. government investigations into Oil-for-Food, in addition to the UN
probe–subpoenaed crates of documents from the bank, which earned $700
million for its work, ostensibly to investigate the companies that had
been doing business through Paribas that may have ripped off
Oil-for-Food. But Capitol Hill insiders say that Paribas itself is of
interest to congressional investigators, in particular whether Paribas
violated "know your client"—style banking regulations, which require
banks to be vigilant in watching for money laundering and other
criminal activities being conducted through their bank. In February,
Congress subpoenaed more documents from the bank, looking for very
specific information. "The international program was managed through
the escrow accounts of BNP maintained in New York and we have pretty
strict banking laws, pretty strict disclosure laws and have gotten even
more so with the passage of the Patriot Act," says one aide to a senior
Republican working for the House International Relations Committee, one
of the bodies investigating the Oil-for-Food program. "There are some
doubts as to the veracity of BNP’s compliance with the more stringent
rules that are contained in the Patriot Act that were law by the end of
‘01."
The reason investigators are interested in Power’s
possible links to the bank that acted as a clearing house for
Oil-for-Food is because the firm also appears to have had a stake in an
oil firm that had been working out lucrative contracts with Iraqi
dictator Saddam Hussein. Subsidiary Pargesa owns the largest single
stake in Total Group Inc. (a Belgian-French petroleum multi-national
corporation formed from the merger of Total, Petrofina and Elf
Aquitaine), which reportedly had been negotiating, prior to the U.S.
invasion in March 2003, rich contracts with former Iraqi dictator
Saddam Hussein to develop and exploit the Majnoon and Nahr Umar oil
fields in southern Iraq. Those regions are estimated to contain roughly
a quarter of Iraq’s reserves. The contracts were on the verge of being
signed in 1997, one year after the beginning of the UN’s Oil-for-Food
program replaced U.S. sanctions on Iraq, when the French government
intervened and stopped the deal. Paul Desmarais Jr., now chairman of
Power Corp. (Paul Sr. retired in 1996, but is said to be active in the
firm), sits on the board of Total, and Power director, François-Poncet,
also sat on the board of Total’s predecessor firm, Totalfina Elf.
Paribas also owned shares in Total as recently as 2000, records show.
Add up the facts that Power Corp. appears to be
connected to an oil company that would benefit extensively if Saddam
remained in power, with the bank appointed by the UN to help broker an
Oil-for-Food program that appears to have been directly enriching
Saddam, and which is being investigated for irregularities that may
have abetted the wholesale corruption that eventually engulfed
Oil-for-Food, and that Power’s owners have a professional and personal
relationship with the man hired by the UN to investigate the
corruption, and it’s no wonder that more and more questions are being
asked about the firm.
The United Nations has refused to co-operate with
the U.S. Congress investigations into the US$67-billion Oil-for-Food
program and Security Council members Russia and France have refused to
give Volcker the right to subpoena witnesses in the internal UN probe.
But the way the scam appears to have worked is that Saddam was
permitted to sell oil to customers he selected himself (he favoured
French and Russian companies) at below-market prices, by allocating
them oil vouchers. The customers could resell the oil at market prices
and make a large profit, provided they kicked back a portion of the
money to Saddam, who used the money for everything but badly needed
food and medicine (the program came to be known by critics as
Oil-for-Palaces). It is estimated that Saddam may have skimmed as much
as US$2 billion from the aid program. And the fact that Iraqis were
suffering while Saddam built up weapons and enriched his own personal
wealth, obviously makes this scandal not only bigger, but more heinous
than any run-of-the-mill Wall Street book-cooking. Companies implicated
in what effectively amounts to crimes against humanity may never
recover. And, to be clear, Power Corp. has not been linked in any
direct way to the con. As for the fact that Power’s name has come up
several times in the investigation, Power’s vice-president, general
counsel and secretary Ted Johnson believes the news reports to be
inaccurate and irresponsible. Says Johnson: "The stories coming out of
the United States are a bunch of misinformation based on innuendo and
half-truths."
There’s a tale they used to tell on Parliament Hill
about a president, a billionaire, an ambassador and a prime minister.
The four of them got into an elevator one day at the National Gallery
of Canada in Ottawa, when Jim Blanchard, the U.S. ambassador to Canada,
began ribbing the billionaire, Paul Desmarais’s son André, about his
recent marriage to France Chrétien, the daughter of then prime minister
Jean Chrétien, as then U.S. president Bill Clinton listened in. "France
certainly married well," Blanchard reportedly said to the prime
minister. To which Chrétien replied, smugly: "André married well."
In reality, the wedding of France and André, in
1981, had only formalized the marriage between the Canadian government
to the Desmaraises. While the family, worth an estimated US$4 billion
and ranked the sixth richest in Canada, has always kept a fairly low
profile, they have been in the news for decades--even if most Canadians
never really noticed. The fact that the family happens to be friendly
with the man who once ran the U.S. federal reserve won’t surprise those
who know them: the Desmaraises are as well connected politically as
they are corporately. And it’s arguable, based on the circumstantial
evidence anyway, that nothing happens on Parliament Hill that isn’t, in
some way, a product of the Desmarais family’s design. Prime Minister
Paul Martin and former PMs Jean Chrétien, Brian Mulroney and Pierre
Trudeau have all been close, personal friends of Paul Desmarais Sr. The
story on Parliament Hill was that Trudeau’s leadership bid was cooked
up in Power headquarters in Victoria Square in Montreal. In the hiatus
of his political career in the 1980s, Chrétien cooled his heels sitting
on the board of a Power Corp. subsidiary, Consolidated Bathurst, and
Power executive John Rae ran Chrétien’s leadership campaigns in 1984
and 1990, as well as the 1993 election campaign that brought Chrétien
to office. Martin got his start in the business world in the early
sixties, working for then Power Corp. president Maurice Strong, and was
made a millionaire, thanks to an undisclosed 1981 deal in which
Desmarais sold him Canada Steamship Lines. Strong continues to act as
one of Martin’s senior advisors.
But the connections don’t end there. Ted Johnson,
the Power vice-president, is a former assistant to Trudeau. Paul
Desmarais Sr. has long been a mentor of former prime minister Brian
Mulroney. Don Mazankowski, a former Mulroney cabinet minister, sits on
Power Corp.’s board. Bill Davis, former premier of Ontario, is on Power
Corp.’s international advisory council. Daniel Johnson Jr., Quebec
Liberal leader and briefly premier, worked for Power from 1973 to 1981.
In fact, the political connections really don’t stop at all. You could
spend days trying to trace the connections that Paul Desmarais Sr. has
not only with Canadian politicians, but in nearly every western capital
in the world. Not bad for a guy from Sudbury, Ont., who started out
fixing buses to save a nearly bankrupt transport company, inherited
from his father. Desmarais’s friends have joked that he "collects
politicians."
And he has been doing it for a long time. Thirty years ago, in his 1976 book,
The Canadian Establishment, Peter C. Newman wrote,
"It seemed to those who knew him best that Desmarais sometimes treated
politicians with the deference due to sleepwalkers: men who must be
led, but ever so gently, lest they wake up to the fact."
If there’s one government in which Power has as much
interest as it does in Canada, it’s the UN. Maurice Strong, president
of Power from 1964 to 1966–who went on to run Ontario Hydro and
Petro-Canada–is not only a member of the Privy Council for Canada and a
direct adviser to Paul Martin, he’s also a senior adviser to UN
Secretary General Kofi Annan. Appointed by Annan in 1997, after he took
over the general secretariat, Strong’s specific role was "to assist
planning and executing a far-reaching reform of the world body." Since
Annan’s son, Kojo, has been implicated in the Oil-for-Food scandal,
having accepted money from a Swiss firm, Cotecna, which was in charge
of overseeing the shipments of food and medicine to Iraqis, Strong’s
presence at Annan’s side provides yet more ammunition to those looking
to link Power to this terrible tale of corruption and mismanagement (no
direct links have been established). In fact, Strong had been an
undersecretary general of the United Nations since 1985. He once told
Toronto journalist Elaine Dewar that he liked working for the UN
specifically because of its undemocratic nature. "He could raise his
own money from whomever he liked, appoint anyone he wanted, control the
agenda," wrote Dewar in her 1995 book, Cloak of Green. "He told me he
had more unfettered power than a cabinet minister in Ottawa. He was
right: no voters had put him in office, he didn’t have to run for
re-election, yet he could profoundly affect many lives."
How close Strong is with Power Corp. these days
isn’t clear. But what is clear is that certain UN policies have been a
boost to the value of the conglomerate. For one thing, the UN-created
Kyoto Protocol–which was spearheaded by none other than Strong himself,
born of the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, which he chaired–could have
significant potential benefits for Power’s holdings in China. Through
their subsidiary, CITIC Pacific Ltd., the Desmaraises own
power-generating facilities, automobile concerns and myriad other
industrial interests throughout the Communist nation. The fact that
Kyoto’s framers deliberately created regulations that will hamstring
exactly those sorts of businesses in the West by imposing limits on
greenhouse gas production, but exempt China from those same limits,
gives Power a competitive international advantage. Meanwhile, under the
protocol, Chinese power plants will be able to sell clean air
"credits," or allowances, to Western producers for cash. Some
economists have predicted that Ottawa will buy credits as a way of
meeting their Kyoto emissions targets.
And few companies stood to benefit from the UN’s
resistance to the invasion of Iraq to the same extent that Total might
have, had Saddam made good on promised resource development deals with
the oil giant. Since the early nineties, Total and Elf had been jointly
negotiating with Hussein to develop the Majnoon oilfields north of
Basra. In 2000, Total’s president of Middle East exploration and
production, had publicly suggested, on several occasions, that the
Oil-for-Food sanctions were hurting Iraqi oil development. Shortly
afterward, the two companies merged, with Power Corp. owning the
biggest stake. According to Power’s official history, "When . . .
Totalfina proceeded to take over Elf Aquitaine, the Pargesa group
emerged as the largest shareholder, with 3.4 per cent of the shares and
three seats on the board of what was to become TotalFina Elf, the
fourth largest integrated petroleum company in the world."
Last year, the New York Post interviewed prominent
Wall Street figure Gerald Hillman, managing partner of Trireme
Investments in New York, who had seen and analyzed the contract. He
called the deal "highly unusual" and "very one-sided," as it permitted
Total to keep 75 per cent of total production, whereas most deals with
foreign partners top out at 50 per cent. It seems that the longer
Saddam stayed in power, the better it was for the Total Group and its
shareholders in Montreal.
The fact that sustaining Saddam directly could have
potentially benefitted a family connected to so many Canadian mandarins
and politicians–and married into the family of the prime minister–led
some Canadians to raise questions about the motivations behind the
Liberal party’s decision to refuse to support the invasion of Iraq and
Saddam’s ouster. When Chrétien announced that decision in early 2003,
Opposition foreign affairs critic Stockwell Day asked in the House of
Commons, "I do not fault the prime minister’s family ties with his
nephew [Raymond Chrétien], our ambassador to France or with Paul
Desmarais Sr., who is the largest individual shareholder of France’s
largest corporation, TotalFina Elf, which has billions of dollars of
contracts with Saddam’s former regime. With this valuable source of
information and experience at his fingertips, has the prime minister
ever discussed Iraq or France with his family or friends in the
Desmarais empire?"
Chrétien responded by defending his nephew first
and, with regard to Power, added: "I hope the attack against the people
who have invested money in something, that he will repeat it outside
and he will face the consequences." Power’s general counsel, Johnson,
told reporters at the time that TotalFina Elf "had no contracts in Iraq
. . . Hasn’t. Doesn’t. Nothing with Saddam." Just a few months earlier,
The New York Times reported that "The French oil giant TotalFina Elf
has the largest position in Iraq, with exclusive negotiating rights to
develop Majnoon, a field on the Iranian border with estimated reserves
of 10 billion barrels, and Bin Umar, with an estimated production
potential of 440,000 barrels a day, according to oil industry
executives."John Thompson, president of the Mackenzie Institute, a
Toronto-based security think-tank, says that Power Corp. directors were
probably not thinking about foreign policy implications when they
invested in TotalFina Elf. "They probably thought–and a lot of people
thought like this–there would eventually be a reopened Iraq, probably
under Saddam but not necessarily, and they would like to be in position
when it did," Thompson says. "Part of this whole thing was the
Europeans bidding to have control of Iraqi oil and afraid that the
Americans would be there instead. For the Americans, it was all about
not having weapons of mass destruction coming out of the area, but for
the Europeans it was all about oil."
Jason Kenney, a Conservative MP, says the questions
being raised about Power’s possible connection to Oil-for-Food are
worth asking. But he’s quick to point out that if the Liberals guided
the country’s foreign policy based on their connections to Power, then
we should be asking questions about the Canadian government, too. "I am
not the least bit critical of the Desmarais family for being rational
actors in a free marketplace and pursuing their advantage," says
Kenney. "I am, however, somewhat disquieted by the degree to which
Power Corp.’s corporate interest seems to influence Canadian foreign
policy. Obviously, every company seeks to influence government
policy–regulatory, taxation or otherwise–but Power Corp. seems to have
a particularly unique influence over Canadian foreign policy."
That’s something that hasn’t been proven. But in
addition to Power’s connection to Total, there’s the connection to
Paribas, the bank selected to be in charge of the Oil-for-Food money.
According to Power Corp.’s official history, produced in 2000, in 1981
it "made a $20-million investment in Pargesa Holding SA, a Swiss
corporation that owned a major interest in Banque de Paris et des
Pays-Bas (Suisse). The Swiss bank had been a subsidiary of Compagnie
Financière de Paris et des Pays-Bas, the French banking organization
commonly known as Paribas, with which Power had enjoyed a close
association for several years."
Nadhmi Auchi, who has been identified as a cousin of
Saddam Hussein, was a significant shareholder in BNP Paribas at least
until 2001. Auchi, who resides in London and owns a company called
General Mediterranean Holdings, was ranked by London’s Sunday Times in
2003 as England’s thirty-fourth richest person, with some estimates
putting his net worth at US$3 billion. In its 2001 annual report,
General Mediterranean Holdings described itself as the largest single
shareholder in BNP Paribas.
Auchi is a former member of Saddam’s Baathist party.
In 1959, he was tried, along with Saddam Hussein, in an attempted
assassination plot. He eventually fled Iraq and publicly distanced
himself from Saddam after the dictator murdered his two brothers. Time
magazine reported in 2003 that Auchi maintained deep connections to
Iraq and built much of his fortune selling them armaments. He has been
fingered as a key figure in the Oil-for-Food scandal, with accusations
that he acted as one of Saddam’s brokers. He certainly is no stranger
to shady deals: in 2003, Auchi was convicted in France of bribery
charges, along with a raft of Elf oil executives, in a scandal dating
back to 1990 involving the sale of a Spanish oil refinery.
Power also has indirect connections to Iraq through
one of its directors, Laurent Dassault, managing director of Dassault
Investissements, the parent company of Dassault Aviation, a
French-based weapons and aeronautics manufacturer that sells, among
other things, the Mirage jet. During Iraq’s eight-year war with Iran in
the eighties, Dassault Aviation was a major supplier of aircraft to the
Hussein regime and it has been alleged that the firm continued illegal
weapon sales to Iraq during the embargo period, using intermediaries
and a complex system of money laundering set up by the Hussein regime.
Meanwhile, the UN had its own reasons for wanting to
keep Oil-for-Food in business. For some strange reason, the aid program
had been set up so that the UN would keep a portion of all oil sold
through the program–compensation for the costs of overseeing the aid
initiative–three per cent of every barrel sold. Aid programs usually
use money from contributing members to finance their administration.
Recipients of previous UN aid programs had not been forced to pay the
overhead of the programs. And since the fee paid to the UN was
variable, the longer Oil-for-Food went on and the more oil that was
sold through it, the more money the world body would earn.
That was not enough, however, for Benon Sevan, the
man appointed by Annan to oversee the Oil-for-Food program. An interim
report issued by Volcker in February found that Sevan–who has since
retired from the UN–had personally requested that Iraq allocate some of
its oil vouchers (with which companies could resell Iraqi oil at a
lucrative profit) to a company with which he was affiliated. Documents
uncovered by investigators indicate that Sevan may have directly been
the beneficiary of oil allocations. Volcker told reporters that Sevan’s
conduct was "ethically improper" and that he had "created a grave and
continuing conflict of interest."
Now, Volcker himself is the one facing allegations
of conflict. In addition to his connections to Power Corp., which he
did not disclose upon being appointed head of the UN probe, Volcker has
also been linked to a pro-UN lobby group, the United Nations
Association of the United States (which happens to receive generous
support from BNP Paribas). Critics are suggesting that the final
report, expected in June, could end up being a whitewash.
Oil-for-Food has certainly put the UN’s credibility
at stake in a way that no other incident has before. The world body has
already demonstrated an inability to deal effectively with rogue
dictators, such as Hussein and North Korea’s Kim Jong Il, and has
proven impotent to end genocides, like Rwanda in 1994 and Darfur today.
But if the world discovers that the UN cannot even run a basic aid
program, then there isn’t much left for it to do. "The liberals are
having a harder time asserting that what the conservatives want is to
get the U.S. out of the UN," says the Republican aide. "They can say
that, but it’s not true. We need international mediating organizations
like the UN. But you know what? We need them to work. And if they are
not working, we are either going to make them work or we are going to
find substitutes," he says. Increasingly, he reports, both Republicans
and Democrats are open to finding alternatives to the UN for handling
international affairs. "Maybe that model is NATO," says the aide. "If
the UN is unreformable, then it will begin to shrink in its importance.
Certainly in the United States it is already shrinking. That can be
good or that can be bad. It is what it is. We do need these
international mediating institutions and if the UN cannot step up to
the plate and do it, then you are going to see a U.S. push in the next
generation to get something else to do it," the aide says.
And certainly that has broad implications for
Canada, whose government invested heavily in the UN when it stood by
the world body’s plan to keep Oil-for-Food in place, rather than stand
by the U.S. in putting an end to a containment program that wasn’t
really containing Saddam at all. Whether Canada’s foreign policy–given
the government’s connection to Power–was "all about the oil," as some
have theorized, however, may never be determined. Or, it likely won’t
be determined here: while there are six probes being conducted into the
Oil-for-Food scandal in the U.S., and one through the UN, there is no
investigation underway in this country into any involvement by Canadian
companies. And, with few exceptions, the Canadian mainstream media
seems to have largely ignored the story linking Volcker to Power Corp.
The firm itself has issued no official statement on the accusations.
One press release did come across the wires on Jan.
27 with good news about Power Corp. Not from the normally quiet Power
itself, mind you, but from KPMG, an accounting firm that works for
Power (and, coincidentally, did audit work on the Oil-for-Food
program). The news? A survey conducted in conjunction with pollsters
Ipsos-Reid and the Globe and Mail found that Power Corp. is considered
the most respected business in Quebec, as ranked by its peers.
Hopefully, when all the smoke clears on Oil-for-Food, that will still
be the case.
|