Has the UN recovered its reputation since the oil for food scandal?

Yes

1 of 2

by Steve Hutcheson

Write now Print Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites RSS Feed Contact this writer

The real scandal of the Oil for Food scandal has been the politicization, particularly by the current US administration of the event rather than a move towards addressing some of the factors that led up to the event and the outcome. In light of all the facts, some 2000 companies and individuals, predominantly US business have been implicated yet the responsibility for their behavior has been handed solely that of the UN and not of the member nations from where they emanated. It is a bit like condemning the hamburger chain and the shareholders when one of its employees steals the change from a customer or more so, a customer steals something from another customer in the car park.
What has tended to get obscured in this argument also are the facts and the culpability of the organization for the actions of independent companies and of Saddam Hussein during this period and of the poor direction given to the UN by the members of the UN security Council.
There were two levels of action happening. One was the blatantly criminal behavior of a few individuals including the UN Program Director at the time Benon Sevan whom are now being indicted or prosecuted for taking kickbacks and bribes. Interestingly the first to be indicted on this matter has been an American who was not actually engaged with the UN.
The other was the large scale theft and smuggling of the oil out of the country that in fact bypassed the UN process altogether. The UN had the responsibility to monitor the contracts as they were presented to them by the Iraqi government. What they had no control over was the myriad illegal activities going on in the background between the Iraqi government and the foreign businesses there. It has been argued the US new of the illegal activities yet chose to do nothing about it. US Senator Carl Levin was quoted in the New York Times, "There is no question that the bulk of the illicit oil revenues came from the open sale of Iraqi oil to Jordan and to Turkey, and that that was a way of going around the Oil-for-Food Program we were fully aware of the bypass and looked the other way."
Protection of the oil pipelines against theft and illegal smuggling was outside the control of the UN as their mandate was only to inspect those transactions that went through their process however they have been incorrectly handed responsibility through public mis-perception of the events. The Security Council unanimously accepted the Volker Report that cleared the UN of major wrongdoing however the stain of the whole affair has remained when it should not have been there in the first place. The resultant findings primarily found fault with the managerial practices of the UN at the time and recommended a raft of procedural corrections that are now being implemented.
Where the UN in all of this is now is dormant. The US administration as principal detractor continues to condemn the UN falling back on the insinuations rather than the facts because in the Security Council and the Chamber it does not always comply with its demands. That unfortunately is a democratic process at work. The public perception it promotes is of a great monolith in New York that soaks up funds. What is not made evident and perhaps is the fault of the UN in not having as successful a public relations machinery as it needs, is the thousands upon thousands of programs and program successes that go on around the world in almost all developing countries that bring a change for the better to millions of lives.
Like with any large bureaucratic organization, the UN needs reform but it also need the resources and management and Directorship to make those reforms. In public life the Directors of a company can be held accountable for the failings of a public business, so too should it be with the UN. The directors in this case are the members of the Security Council and more so the senior members however that is an often overlooked convenience.
Until these senior directors of the UN stop condemning the organization for reasons of political expediency and start looking at their own participation and part in it more objectively then the UN will constantly be the whipping boy and its progress will constantly be stunted. Has it recovered from the scandal? That depends on who is looking. For those that want to see the political advantage in condemning it won't appreciate its work, those that know better, it has. The scandal was an aberration that has past and appropriately dealt with as a single issue as it should be.

Learn more about this author, Steve Hutcheson.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.