Posted on 04/22/2003 3:59:13 PM PDT by knak
KICKBACKS from Iraq’s oil sales have run into billions of dollars because of loopholes in the United Nations Oil-for-Food system designed to feed the Iraqi people. Diplomats said yesterday that Saddam Hussein’s regime sometimes exacted an illegal surcharge of as much as 55-75 cents (30-45p) a barrel on its daily oil sales of some two million barrels under the programme, although the amount was generally 15-25 cents.
“We thought they were getting at least $500 million a year in illegal kickbacks,” one Western official said.
The money funnelled to Baghdad helped to finance its banned weapons programmes, but it could also have been used to buy influence abroad.
Iraq was able to choose which companies were awarded lucrative contracts to export oil or to import food, medicine or other humanitarian supplies.
The main beneficiaries were companies from Saddam’s political protectors at the United Nations, some of them trading companies with little more than a brass plate on the door.
Over the seven years of the Oil-for-Food programme, Russian companies got $7.3 billion worth of Iraqi business, almost twice as much as firms from any other country. Next on the list of leading trading partners were Egypt, with $4.3 billion; France, with $3.7 billion; and Jordan, the United Arab Emirates and China with some $3 billion each.
Diplomats said that British firms won “minimal” business, almost all of it in the health sector, worth a couple of hundred million dollars over the life of the programme.
The Oil-for-Food programme began operation in 1996 after Iraq agreed to allow the UN to supervise its oil sales and the purchases of food and medicine it made with the revenue.
All oil contracts have to be approved by the UN sanctions committee, made up of the 15 Security Council members. The money is deposited in a UN escrow account at the Banque Nationale de Paris, where it can be spent to purchase goods approved by the sanctions committee.
Over the years the Security Council lifted any restriction on the amount of oil that Iraq could sell and the oil price rose, sending Baghdad’s oil revenues up to an annual rate of some $20 billion.
During the same period the council progressively lifted sanctions on civilian goods that could be purchased with the oil money.
Under the rules, Iraq can buy anything except military equipment, unless it is on a “goods review list” of dual-use items that require specific sanctions committee approval.
The opportunity for siphoning off money from Oil-for-Food business arose because of the difficulty of setting a realistic price for Iraq’s crude.
The oil price is established by UN oil “overseers”, who try to make it track the world market. The contract price must then be approved by the sanctions committee, where any single member can block it.
There were originally three overseers, but the US and Norwegian members quit, leaving only a Russian who was sometimes criticised for setting the price too high. For several years, Russia blocked new replacements. But Moscow eventually relented. Iraq was able to exploit price fluctuations to ensure that the UN-fixed price allowed enough margin for extra profits to be skimmed off.
Britain led a campaign last year to change the UN system to “retro-active pricing”, so that actual, rather than predicted, market conditions were taken into account. The result has been that illegal surcharges were reduced, before the war, to an estimated three to five cents a barrel.
Diplomats also suspect that Iraqi officials profited from trading on the world oil markets on inside information from Baghdad's oil decisions, such as its frequent moves to suspend and resume pumping crude.
The Oil-for-Food programme has a budget that is many times larger than that of the UN secretariat itself, yet it operates in great secrecy.
Although all oil contracts have to be approved by the sanctions committee, the body meets behind closed doors and details of transactions are not made public.
Members of the sanctions committee say that some 1,129 companies from 86 countries are registered with the UN to do Oil-for-Food business.
The UN escrow account currently holds some $10.3 billion earmarked for such items as $437 million of health-related material, $513 million of water and sanitation gear and $1.3 billion of electrical equipment.
A quarter of Iraq's oil revenues are set aside to settle claims from the first Gulf War and a further 3 per cent goes to finance the UN weapons inspection effort in Iraq and other administrative costs.
No wonder they don't want the 'program' to stop.
Kofi Annan $?
"Oil for Food"--The embezzlers got oiled; the Iraqis got starved.
America has been slammed at every turn by the leftist press and maggots from Clooney to Murray.
And the talking clymers refuse to acknowledge the warehouses of food Saddam kept from the people.
Throw Kofi from the train and demolish the UN complex.
Bring over several C-17 Galaxies full of looters and tape the biggest reality show of the season.
"Alright, people, you will be locked up in the UN Plaza for ten days with only diplomats to eat. At the end of that time you can have all the desks, chairs and file cabinets you can carry. Go!"
There was once a Senator from Alabama or some neighboring state (15-20 years ago), whose son got nailed by the feds on a big dope charge. The senator tried to bribe a fed judge and got caught. His comment after getting caught is perfect for this scenario.
"This is like stirring a bucket of sh!t, the more you stir it, the more it stinks.
Is it any wonder if rumors can be believed that the former impeached prez #42 is heard to be interested in running this mobster clan?
Yep, especialy the DemoncRATS...they demand corruption out of their candidates, and "leaders".
Hey, backhoe! I have been reading tons of documents since I asked you that question last night. I haven't yet found the answer.
It's interesting that the complaints against the sanctions committee have been directed against the US and UK for our demands for more stringent controls over contracts AND verification of use for the money.
No surprise that leftists were complaining about the sanctions starving the Iraqis and the "obstructionist tactics" of the Americans and the Brits.
I'll keep reading.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.