The National Review is calling for Kofi Annan’s head in its new subscription edition. “You’re Fired!” says the cover. The article begins:
This has been a wretched year for Kofi Annan. The U.N. secretary general has looked a forlorn figure on the world stage: Hugely overshadowed as a global leader by George W. Bush and Tony Blair, he has appeared weak and clueless in confronting major problems, including terrorism, WMD proliferation in Iran and elsewhere, and genocide in Sudan. At the same time, the massive scandal over the U.N.’s administration of the Iraq Oil for Food program has brought the world body’s reputation to an all-time low. To cap it all, in the wake of a series of internal scandals, the U.N.’s own employee union has just passed a vote of no confidence in the U.N.’s senior management: a thinly veiled protest against Annan himself.
The secretary general is now an embittered spectator of world events, and lets barely a week pass without a sermon on the perils of America’s supposedly unilateralist foreign policy. A spectacular failure, as well as a great mediocrity, Annan is looking increasingly ineffectual and isolated. His attacks on the U.S. over its decision to go to war with Iraq indicate a U.N. in steep, possibly terminal decline, struggling for relevance.
As for the Oil for Food scandal, it is more than just the biggest scandal in the U.N.’s history; it may well be the biggest financial fraud in modern times. Set up in the mid-1990s as a means of providing humanitarian aid to Iraqis, the Oil for Food program was subverted and manipulated by Saddam Hussein’s regime, allegedly with the complicity of U.N. officials, to help prop up the Iraqi dictator. Saddam’s dictatorship was able to siphon an estimated $21.3 billion from the program through oil smuggling and systematic thievery, by demanding illegal payments from companies buying Iraqi oil and kickbacks from those selling goods to Iraq. All this took place under the noses of U.N. bureaucrats: According to the report of U.S. weapons inspector Charles Duelfer, Benon Sevan ‚Äî Annan’s appointee as executive director of the Iraq program ‚Äî received from Saddam a voucher for 13 million barrels of oil.
Meanwhile another group of Americans is apologizing to the European profiteers from this same Oil-for-Food scandal for Bush’s victory in our democratically held elections. Obviously, I think these folks are in cloud-cuckoo-land, largely because I would wager very few of them even know what Oil-for-Food is, at least to any serious degree, or have the faintest idea of its ramifications. But, hey, this is a democracy. They’re entitled to apologize to anyone they want to – Bin Laden, Zarqawi, Jacques Chirac or their Danish girl friend – just as long as they do it in their own names, not mine.
And one other thing – when democracy’s in danger, you don’t call Brussels.
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
29 Comments
1. Dave:Ref: sorryeverybody.com
I’m sorry, too, . . .
. . . that the world ignored your plight under a cruel dictator for 30 years;
. . . that the dictator used poison gas on his own citizens;
. . . that the dictator skimmed billions of dollars from the Oil for Food program;
. . . that the dictator allowed his own people to starve so he could build palaces for himself.
I am sorry for this and so much more, but I am NOT sorry . . .
. . . that the dictator was caught hiding in a rat hole;
. . . that the thugs in Falluja are on the run;
. . . but mostly I am NOT sorry that the people of Iraq will be able to vote for the government of their choice.
Dave
Nov 24, 2004 - 12:16 pm 2. BeckyJ:Sadly, most of my academic colleagues are unaware of the scandal surrounding the oil-for-food program. I think I’m correct in saying most of them don’t want to know; scandal at the UN hits one of their most venerated institutions…it can’t be! I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised, but I am; the level of denial is phenomenal. Oh well, gives me a giggle.
As for the “sorry” website, I much prefer We’re Not Sorry and some of the spoofing others have done on the “sorry” pictures (can’t find links right now).
Have a great Thanksgiving holiday all!
Nov 24, 2004 - 12:20 pm 3. notthisgirl:Geesh! I should have waited until today to post this http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N22713789.htm sorry I’m repeating myself. However, this is much more *on topic*.
I’m still waiting to hear from the MSM on this one. HAH – I guess I better exhale on this one too, huh?
Nov 24, 2004 - 1:04 pm 4. Michael B:Great post and an illuminating NR piece that ably distills the mephitic corpulence that now is the UN as a transnationalist, notably undemocratic – and largely unchecked – bureacracy and nomenklatura.
It isn’t merely that the emperor has no clothes, he’s buck naked, pale and grotesquely unkempt with spot lights and klieg lights illuminating that fact for all to see. All, that is, excepting for the obdurately self-blinded who are still heaping praise upon the emperor and his beautiful raiment. Tragi-comic and pitiably so; the tragedy is now far outstripping the more comedic interludes provided by Kofi and gang.
Nov 24, 2004 - 1:30 pm 5. Occam's Beard:They are sorry…and also apologetic.
Nov 24, 2004 - 1:32 pm 6. David Thomson:President Bushís reelection makes it virtually certain that Kofi Annan is finished. The Democratic majority may still retain some sentimental feelings for the UN—but the Bush administrationís attitude is simply: ìWhat have you done for me lately?î The hell with the UNís past good deeds. Itís today that requires our attention. We need an entity like the UN, but that doesnít mean that the present organization cannot be replaced.
Nov 24, 2004 - 1:40 pm 7. Roberts:Past good deeds, David? Hmmm, I’m scratching my chin here …
Nov 24, 2004 - 1:44 pm 8. RogerA:Add to the egregious behavior of the UN that of their blue helmeted “peacekeepers.” http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-1366745,00.html. Those of us who have served along side the blue helmets have some knowledge of their rapaciouness, both materially and sexually. See Glen Reynolds suggestion that Vaclav Havel be made the new Secretary General.
Nov 24, 2004 - 1:57 pm 9. holdfast:RogerA – easy there guy. I yield to no man in my loathing of the UN and most of its works, but the “blue helmets” are only as good (or as bad) as the nations they represent. In practice this means that many are bad, some are fair and a few are good or very good.
As regads Havel, I’m not a fan of the idea (though I am a fan of the man). Making him into the SG will just give the UN a big shot of undeserved credibility. Sure it would be nice to have a good SG, but the rot and corruption are now endemic to the organization, and there’s no way that Havel or anyone else can sole it at this point. Besides, it won’t happen – the SG is pretty much guaranteed to be from some 3rd world rathole.
Nov 24, 2004 - 2:15 pm 10. David Thomson:ì…but the “blue helmets” are only as good (or as bad) as the nations they represent.î
Nope, the blue helmets are only as good as their leaders will allow them to be. If idiots run the show at the UN—then even the best troops are rendered impotent.
ìBesides, it won’t happen – the SG is pretty much guaranteed to be from some 3rd world rathole.î
Are you implying that Vaclav Havel is too white? If so, you are right. Political correctness underpins the operating philosophy of the UN. I agree that the decline is probably too far to reverse. Only the removal of Kofi Annan even gives the UN a remote chance for survival.
Nov 24, 2004 - 2:34 pm 11. RogerA:Holdfast–you’re right, ok course, that I painted with a broad brush; troops coming from what I call the professional peacekeepers, eg Fijian, Canadians etc are generally overall professional; troops coming from some of the third world kleptocracies generally reflect the attributes of their leaders. And as David Thomson note, the real problem is the leadeship of these troops both on the ground (see the case of the Canadian general who commanded the peace keepers in Rwanda ten years ago) or vague mandates from Turtle Bay. I do not recall where the UN is in the formula for selecting the SG; where it the first world’s “turn” Havel would certainly be a symbolic selection.
Nov 24, 2004 - 2:44 pm 12. Terrye:Sorry my behind.
I sent that idiot a rather unkind email.
I am in facting waiting to hear them say things are the same in the Ukriane as they are here. We are after all just another poor backward nation run by autocratic pretenders to the throne.
Needless to say this inability to know a bad guy when you see one is what got the UN and the apologizers in trouble. They just keep betting on the wrong people and blaming everybody else when things go badly.
I don’t know if the UN will survive this or not and if the academics don’t know what the food for oil scandal is I suggest they wake up and start paying attention. It may well be the beginning of the end for the UN.
Nov 24, 2004 - 2:49 pm 13. notthisgirl:I don’t know. But do you all get the feeling that academia and many of the elite class of this country are actually quite uninformed? Much more than we’d ever imagined?
I’m surprised. But on the other hand, maybe not. Can we say: D.E.N.I.A.L. ??? I guess if there’s a hint of inpropriety on the left-side of the events spectrum, they turn their backs and just pretend it’s not happening. Why lift a finger to check it out?
These folks have always stereo-typed Republicans as being knuckle-dragging yes-men/women who drank the right-wing Kool-Aid. They seem to be – what they accuse others of!
Thank God for the blogosphere!
Nov 24, 2004 - 3:07 pm 14. David Thomson:ìdon’t know. But do you all get the feeling that academia and many of the elite class of this country are actually quite uninformed? Much more than we’d ever imagined?î
This is not news to me. Iíve long argued that someone possessing a liberal arts Ph.D. should be treated like a naive fool until proven otherwise. This is prudent behavior and not an indulgence in envy driven ìanti-intellectualism.î Piled, higher, and deeper in foolishness is exactly what normally goes on. These people are usually out to lunch. The so-called elites are rarely elite! More often than not, they should be pitied—and marginalized.
PS: I also include those Ph.D.s in the hard sciences when they opt to speak about subjects outside of their specialty. Ever hear of Noam Chomsky?
Nov 24, 2004 - 3:41 pm 15. Charlie (Colorado):PS: I also include those Ph.D.s in the hard sciences when they opt to speak about subjects outside of their specialty. Ever hear of Noam Chomsky?
Hard sciences? Chomsky? Nah, his PhD is in Linguistics (UPenn 1955) and he makes rather a point that he found a professor who shared his politics.
Nov 24, 2004 - 4:20 pm 16. BeckyJ:Hey! I resemble those Ph.D. remarks!! :->
Actually, as Roger has noted about Hollywood, there are a lot more closet conservatives in academia than were suspected earlier. Granted, not a lot, but more than I thought. Of course, the expected hunting grounds of sociology, social work, anthropology, the humanities, and (duh!) women’s studies burn at the stake anybody expressing viewpoints at odds with the accepted ideology. In political science (my discipline) there are more people coming out of the woodwork. Partly it’s a function of the tenure system; speak out before tenure is granted and you run the risk of losing your job. I got outed before this election and I am (justifiably I believe) a bit nervous as to how that will play in my bid for tenure. Of course, I’m an ornery b**ch and will raise an unholy ruckus should my political orientation become a tenure issue.
Nov 24, 2004 - 4:40 pm 17. jedrury:At the risk of being overly rambunctious, is it in the interests of the president to have an irreproachable world figure like Vaclav Havel as UN Secretary ?
A weakened UN may not be in the interests of an aggressive American foreign policy. Kofi Annan
is only the visible head of an institution far too deliberative and compromising in this post 9/11 world.
Nov 24, 2004 - 4:58 pm 18. richard mcenroe:Hmmm. Maybe when you’re in trouble, you should call Brussels. Let freedom sprout and all that…
Nov 24, 2004 - 5:32 pm 19. holdfast:David T – yeah, too white describes it – also to pro-freedom, pro-US and anti-corruption. Also too damned good for that place. And too hard to dis when we need to dis the UN (and we do and we will). Bad idea all ’round.
RogerA – you are right in that gutless leaders back home can cripple even the best blue berets. Two Canadian examples:
1)The Medac pocket – ever heard of it? Nope, neither have most Canadians. It was the heaviest combat for Canadians since Korea (OK, stop laughing) – the PPCLI guys killed and wounded dozens of Croats, losing none of their own. NCOs maintained fire discipline, and the troops performed wonderfully. But, of course, peacekeepers are supposed to be peaceful. Just look at the new Canadian $10 (I think, it could be the 5) bill – a friendly looking female peacekeeper armed with a pair of binoculars – no friggin weapon visible! This is how the Lib Liars sell it to the Canadian people, and Medac didn’t fit the narative. It didn’t make the press until a couple of YEARS later when some guys retired and started talking to the papers.
2) CAN’T BAT – all the battalions in the FRY were given national appelations like BRITBAT, BELGBAT etc – not so good for Nigeria, but I digress. Anyway, Canada was CANBAT – and for years managed to maintain a “don’t f*ck with us” attitute and reputation (often based on bluffs, but what the hell), which helped enormously in dealing with the locals. Sometime in 1995, I believe, Ottawa ordered the troops to back down from a potential “situation”, and not to annoy the local commander. After that the Brits took to calling it CAN’TBAT, and you can be sure that locals had even worse things to say. Years of work and risk pissed away in a minute. Typically (Liberal) Canadian.
Nov 24, 2004 - 6:09 pm 20. jerry:Becky:
There are lots of uncloseted conservatives in academia. Economics departments are notoriously unliberal. I would bet that science and engineering departments are filled with red staters. Russian/Slavic Departments were also once bastions of the right but I don’t know what has happened to them since the USSR closed up shop.
Nov 24, 2004 - 8:52 pm 21. richard mcenroe:Speaking of the National Review ó Happy Birthday, William F. Buckley!
Nov 24, 2004 - 9:08 pm 22. rastajenk:As long as Libs have Halliburton as their icon for corruption, there will be no need to acknowledge the mess at the UN.
Nov 25, 2004 - 3:51 am 23. legion:It may be time to survey the UN building for demolition. A far better use for that parcel of land could be found. Perhaps a landfill?
Nov 25, 2004 - 7:47 am 24. Nomorelies:Sorry? I don’t view them as apologies. These are hopeless losers simply describing themselves as sorry people. They are a sorry lot which has nothing to do with the outcome of the election.
Nov 25, 2004 - 7:54 am 25. ex-democrat:Wretchard also has an interesting post on this subject today: http://belmontclub.blogspot.com
Nov 25, 2004 - 8:07 am 26. ex-democrat:OT (but related to a previous thread) new reports from NK at http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/afp/20041125/wl_asia_afp/nkorea_kim_badge
Nov 25, 2004 - 1:03 pm 27. richard mcenroe:All kidding aside, has anyone else noticed Roger is quoting THE NATIONAL REVIEW?
Roger, your journey to the dark side is almost complete *wheeze*clik* Soon you will be reading American Spectator and then we shall rule the blogoverse as father and son…
Nov 25, 2004 - 1:47 pm 28. DanK:Dear Roger,
As always, you’re beautiful. But please: Don’t use words like “your Danish girlfriend” lumped among that gang of crooks. I’m a Dane and a big fan of yours. Achievements of our country in the war on terror: All combat aircraft in the Royal Danish Air Force have served on rotations in the skies over Afghanistan, killing thousands of bad guys. All active personnel in the Danish special forces have seen action either in Tora Bora or Iraq, most of them in both. We have a biggish chunk of our army in Iraq and our parliament only yesterday decided to extend our commitment – with a whopping majority. Our special forces may not be big but they’re recognised by people in the know as good. Want to be a US navy SEAL? Fine, part of your education will be with our “wet” special forces unit.
Just because you’ve met Danish liberals in the past, don’t think we’re all like that – basically it’s just the same as the hideous racial stereotyping of Condi Rice.
So get back to what’s important – keeping up the pressure on the enemy!
Dan
Nov 26, 2004 - 8:46 am 29. Pat Curley:What gets me about SorryEverybody is that as with everything these people want to apologize for, it’s not something they did. How many of these folks would like to apologize for stealing the USA from the Indians, or for slavery or for Jim Crow, but ask them to apologize for something they did individually (e.g., Billy Bob’s little adventures with the intern), and suddenly they want to know why we’re so judgmental.
Nov 26, 2004 - 9:41 pm