It is becoming a recurring decimal for Washington to use a red herring to obfuscate their true intentions on matters of magnitude and impact on international relations that is beyond belief. It is common knowledge that Kofi Annan has become a thorn in the flesh of George Bush and his cronies in Washington, especially with respect to issues bordering on American unilateralism and imperialist tendencies. The UNO was formed as the voice of the world and the USA is not the world. I think this is the central theme of Annan's disagreements with Washington. In trying to exact their pound of flesh from Annan, we may yet be saying au revoir to the UN as the bastion of hope for the world. This may yet be the beggining of the end for this body.
___________________ This war of attrition on the Igbo must end now! Posts: 441 | From: california, US | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
hmmmmmmmmm, This is the same Bush administration who saw nothing wrong in letting Saudis (untouchables) fly out of the US after 9-11.
Kofi should have known they will do anything to get rid of him.
Talking about France (Ivory Coast, Chaos), Germany, skin heads)
How relevant is the UN in this day and age? i.e Dafur, Chechnia, Anambra, Zimbabwe?
Can the UN Influence France, Germany, Britain, Swiss to return stolen African wealth by African leaders? instead of the peanut they give us in so called aids!
Over all, Who is Anan really working for?
Posts: 380 | From: US | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
quote: Over all, Who is Anan really working for? - Nwa-Afor
Fantastic question. Whose interest is this man protecting since he has done absolutely nil to propagate African causes?
addy, how na? Your post is one of those catch-22 where one does not support American hideous agenda towards the U.N. And on the other hand, do not care much about the Ghana dude too.
___________________ BIAFRA: The land of my ancestors now, yesterday and always. So it will be! Posts: 2482 | From: Ala Igbo | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
It's payback time for Kofi Annan By Caroline Overington December 4, 2004
The UN Secretary-General is feeling the weight of the Bush Administration's anger over his role in the US election.
The whisper in Washington is that there were two losers on November 2.
The first was John Kerry, who lost the election to President Bush.
The second was Kofi Annan. Mr Annan wanted Senator Kerry to win, in part because he loves his job as UN Secretary-General and hoped for an unprecedented third term, something Mr Bush was not likely to back.
He did all he could to help Senator Kerry, even telling the BBC in the week before the election that, in his opinion, the war in Iraq was illegal.
The comment was designed to hurt Mr Bush, but it failed. Now it's payback time.
It is no secret that many in the Bush Administration are trying to blast Mr Annan from office, not only because they think he sided with the Democrats, but because he has refused to send UN staff to Iraq, saying it's still not safe.
They have hammered him mercilessly over the oil-for-food program, a scandal that continues to grow.
Earlier this week some Republicans called for Mr Annan's resignation. He is unlikely to pay any attention but, on the off-chance that it happens, the US won't be able to take the credit, since Mr Annan is doing a tremendous job of sinking himself.
After all, if everything that is being said about the UN is true, his six-year run as Secretary-General has been a spectacular failure.
According to investigators, Saddam Hussein ripped $US20 billion ($A26 billion) from the UN's oil-for-food program under Mr Annan's watch and used the money to strengthen his control of Iraq, just as sanctions were supposed to weaken his regime.
It is further alleged that some UN staff - including the head of the oil-for-food program - were taking bribes from Saddam.
In other matters, it is alleged that a senior UN staffer regularly sexually harasses his staff and that Mr Annan dismissed complaints about it and that UN peacekeepers in the Congo have been demanding bribes in exchange for food, and raping and beating local women (and taking photographs of it).
'(He's) open, he listens, he doesn't roll over, and he always tries to do what's right.' - Colin Powell
If that were not enough, Mr Annan's own son is accused of making money from the oil-for-food program, by taking payments from a Swiss company that had a UN contract.
This is hardly the legacy the Secretary-General wanted to leave. But then, history was unlikely to judge him kindly.
Mr Annan has worked for the UN for four decades, rising from an entry-level budget officer to Secretary-General, the highest office.
Throughout the 1990s he was head of the UN's peacekeeping office. The UN's peacekeeping efforts during that time were disastrous. Its most shocking failures were in Bosnia, where 20,000 men and boys were slaughtered after being abandoned by peacekeepers in so-called UN "safe" areas, and in Rwanda, where more than 800,000 people were hacked to death with no intervention.
Mr Annan knew that a massacre in Rwanda was imminent. The head of the UN's peacekeeping mission, Major-General Romeo Dallaire, sent him an urgent memo, practically begging him to intervene before the killings began.
Mr Annan does not deny that he should have done something - anything - to try to prevent the killings.
"All of us must bitterly regret that we did not do more to prevent it," he said, in 2001. "On behalf of the United Nations, I acknowledge this failure and express my deep remorse."
Given these facts, many were surprised when Mr Annan and the UN received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2001. Then again, it was not for making peace, but for "revitalising" the UN.
Mr Annan was, by then, the organisation's seventh secretary-general.
The US backed him into the role in 1997, saying he was someone they could work with. He had some early successes: he persuaded the US to pay the $1 billion in dues it had been withholding.
Just one year later, however, he made a goose of himself in Iraq. In those days, Saddam was refusing to let weapons inspectors in but Mr Annan believed he could persuade the dictator to do the right thing.
He borrowed a private jet from French President Jacques Chirac and flew to Baghdad to negotiate with the tyrant. They smoked cigars together and Mr Annan told Saddam he was a leader of "courage".
Saddam told Mr Annan he would let the weapons inspectors return, and Mr Annan was hailed as a hero. He got a state dinner in Paris. Mr Chirac thanked Mr Annan for preventing a third world war.
But Mr Annan had been duped. Saddam had no intention of letting weapons inspectors return. Within six months, president Bill Clinton was bombing the country again.
Mr Annan's legacy is not entirely negative. In 1990 - before he was Secretary-General - he helped secure the release of 900 Westerners and UN staff being held hostage in Iraq. The peacekeeping effort in East Timor is regarded as a success.
He is also very popular in some quarters, which is not a bad thing for a diplomat to be. He is sometimes call the "rock star" diplomat because he hangs out with people like Bono; he eats in New York's best restaurants and lives with his second wife in a mansion formerly owned by the banker, J.P. Morgan's family.
He also has powerful friends. Colin Powell once described him as "open, he listens, he doesn't roll over, and he always tries to do what's right". The former US ambassador to the UN, Richard Holbrooke, has described him as the "best secretary-general in the history of the UN".
Former US secretary of state Madeleine Albright says he is "very gentle, somebody who speaks with a very low voice. But he also shows a great deal of determination".
But he has enemies, too. On October 31, Mr Annan wrote to the US and Britain, urging them not to launch an assault on insurgents.
Iraq's interim Defence Minister, Hazem Sa'alan, scoffed. "Where was Kofi Annan when Saddam was slaughtering the Iraqis like sheep?"
___________________ This war of attrition on the Igbo must end now! Posts: 441 | From: california, US | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Addy: On a serious note, what will Anan be remembered for?
Would it be as one that stood by while thousands died Rwanda/Seira leone/ Liberia? Most vocal supporter of Saddam? i.e Oil for food and family ties Most vocal opponent of the US war against Iraq?
Most vocal enemy of Israel, i.e tacit support of palestinian suicide bombers?
Attracted the most $$$ for aids victims in Africa?
Created opportunities for other Africans to follow in his stead?
How would you describe his tenure, good or bad ?
Posts: 380 | From: US | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
posted
For those of us who are students of International politics and history, it is not surprising that we (Americans) are turning back on Anna now. It would actually be un-American not to turn against him. Remember Noriega, remembers Boutrous Ghali, remember Saddam? We used them, and dumped them when they get too big for their pants.
Meanwhile, I think Anna might have a serious problem on his hand in regards to the allegation against his son, and his denial of having any knowledge of it. The buck stop on Anna’s table and he should own up to that fact.
posted
de ghana man must go! how ghana man go tink say im na intanachional leada sef? make im comot quick quick o. for only dat one me i like naija, bicos naija know say dat "Ghana must go"! de time when dem throway ghana comot from naija i dey for lagos dey look dem how dem carry di dem pipul of ghana for lorry like cattle.
abeg, make anan comot!
___________________ OjuElegba - Moto dey come from North, South, East, West, Up, Down, Centa and Middul. Posts: 21 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
posted
For those who are willing to critique the legacies of Kofi Annan, i recommend further arming yourselves with facts about the United Nations. If after doing that, you still feel the same way, then we'll open a discussion on the merits and demerits of those positions. Here will be a nice place to start the research:
Has the role of the UN diminished in meeting its Charter?
or has it increased?
Has the UN like the US been two faced in meeting world challenges?
Is the UN better suited to promote social progress and better standard of life in larger freedom or is it better suited to promote world peace?
While the UN does not interfere with individual nations affairs, has it been fair in condemning attrocious acts by individual nations or does it handpick depending on poll results?
In a polarized world with different vested interest, achieving world peace, unity and progress will always be elusive.
The best Anan could do is promote issues dear to him within the confines of his mandate.
China, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan all have deplorable human rights records, yet the United States picks and chooses who to deal with depending on what is in its best interest.
African Leaders continue to siphon our wealth to Western Countries, how do we stop that? How do we make Western nations repatrate our stolen wealth? Do we have to continously depend on the pitiance they offer us in aids?
Overall, Anan is doing a good job, but he needs do more for Africans because he is our son.
Posts: 380 | From: US | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
posted
From the World News section of the Los Angeles Times comes this commentary. I thought that I should put it up side by side to that which Addy presented.
quote: THE WORLD
Annan: Part of the Problem, or Its Solution?
• The U.N. chief's response to charges of corruption in the Iraq 'oil-for-food' program has left him vulnerable amid a push for reforms.
By Maggie Farley, Times Staff Writer.
WASHINGTON — When Secretary of State Colin L. Powell met Secretary-General Kofi Annan last month at an Egyptian summit on Iraq, the two old friends shook hands. Then Powell handed the U.N. chief a letter.
Iraqi elections are in two months and the United Nations has to send more electoral experts to Iraq right away, the letter said, according to U.S. and U.N. officials. The Americans will arrange the protection they need, so it was time for the world body to act.
The same day, news broke that Annan's son, Kojo, had lied about how long he had been involved with a Swiss inspection firm that won a lucrative U.N. contract in Iraq.
The events, though apparently coincidental, were a one-two punch. Annan cut his Africa trip short and took the next flight home, just in time to hear calls from Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.) and a few media outlets for the secretary-general's resignation.
It was a very bad week for Annan, and supporters worry that the attacks will get worse if investigations into the alleged corruption in the U.N.-run "oil-for-food" program in Iraq result in more allegations.
"It's payback time for the U.N.," said a Bush administration official who did not want his name used because he was not authorized to speak on the record. "The bills are coming due for the U.N.'s noncooperation on Iraq, and the oil-for-food scandal is red meat for the U.N.'s critics."
Annan is caught in a struggle for his future. The secretary-general who wanted his legacy to be the reform of the United Nations may see it become instead presiding over one of the world body's worst scandals, even though Saddam Hussein was behind the corruption.
The U.N. began the oil-for-food program, through which Iraq sold about $65 billion worth of oil, in 1996 to soften the impact on Iraqis of sanctions meant to keep Hussein's regime from rearming after the 1991 Persian Gulf War. The program improved the welfare of Iraqis, but it also enabled the Iraqi leader to amass more than $10 billion from kickbacks and smuggling. He also allegedly offered bribes to prominent figures around the world, including the U.N. official in charge of the program, to undermine the sanctions.
There are eight investigations of the program, including an independent U.N. inquiry led by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker. After Volcker makes his first report in January, he will share the 55 internal U.N. audits he possesses with other investigators. His final verdict is due at the end of 2005.
And so in New York and Washington, questions hover: Can Annan position himself as the leader of reform, or will he be perceived as part of the mess that needs to be swept away in a massive housecleaning? And has he hurt himself and the U.N. irrevocably by not opening the world body to greater scrutiny?
Annan and his aides acknowledged that they were slow to confront the allegations, feeding a perception that they were hiding something.
"It's a godsend the way Annan's been handling this," said one U.S. congressional investigator. "It's simply a gift to his enemies."
Coleman, the Republican senator, does not accuse Annan of wrongdoing but says the U.N. chief should resign to take responsibility for the oil-for-food program's failings.
"It is so clear to me that any organization in which the CEO presided over such a massive fraud should step down to allow it to restore its credibility," said Coleman, who heads the Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, which is examining the corruption charges.
Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) and Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) are preparing twin bills to tie American funding for the U.N. to the organization's cooperation with the investigations, withholding increasing amounts of America's 22% share of the body's budget until Congress is satisfied.
In an irony of timing, the demands that Annan resign to increase the U.N.'s accountability came as a panel of 16 prominent global figures presented a report that he commissioned a year ago about how to improve the U.N.'s accountability and efficiency. The report calls for improved internal oversight, offers proposals to fight terrorism and weapons proliferation, and suggests a buyout to rid the organization of "deadwood" — all reforms that congressional leaders have been demanding.
When he presented the report to the U.N.'s 191-member General Assembly on Wednesday, Annan received a standing ovation in an expression of support.
But if he is perceived as an obstacle to the very reforms he commissioned — and their funding — that could increase pressure from within the U.N. for him to step down, said a Security Council diplomat.
"Can he continue to serve the United Nations when the most powerful member of the U.N. is not willing to work with him?" said the diplomat, who requested anonymity because of the issue's sensitivity.
American conservatives also were infuriated by what they perceived as U.N. officials' attempts to tip last month's U.S. elections against President Bush.
In interviews, U.S. officials and members of Congress recited a list of alleged transgressions: In September, Annan called the invasion of Iraq "illegal"; the next month, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency said powerful explosives had disappeared in Iraq under the watch of U.S.-led forces; and two days before the U.S. elections, Annan sent Bush a letter arguing against the eventual attack on the Iraqi city of Fallouja.
To the U.N.'s foes, the oil-for-food allegations are the perfect vehicle in which to pack their accumulated complaints against the world body.
None of the investigations have suggested that Annan took bribes or acted illegally. The most serious complaint against him is that he has blocked congressional investigators' access to U.N. documents and employees, though he recently agreed to hand over internal documents through Volcker in January and to allow staffers to do informal interviews.
That doesn't stop politicians such as Rep. Scott Garrett (R-N.J.) from demanding that Annan pay a heavy price for the scandal. "The larger question is whether he should be in jail," Garrett said Monday.
But the attacks have also sparked support from leaders around the world, and every country in the Security Council, save one: Bush has withheld his affirmation of confidence in Annan until the investigations are finished.
The American government's arm's-length reaction may have strategic intent, administration officials said. As Powell's letter made clear, the White House needs the U.N.'s help holding the Iraqi elections scheduled for Jan. 30. Having the criticism come from other quarters provides leverage over the organization and the man the U.S. helped bring to office eight years ago.
In response to Powell's letter about providing more help for Iraq's elections, Annan replied that except for security, election preparations are on track. U.N. staff have trained nearly 6,000 Iraqi election workers and there are 22 electoral experts in Iraq finalizing polling arrangements, with more coming soon.
Even among those scrutinizing the U.N.'s failings most closely are voices that say Annan should not resign. Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.), who is leading one of the investigations, said problems exposed by the oil-for-food scandal were institutional, not personal, and if anyone had the incentive to change things it would be Annan.
"This is the secretary-general's last, best chance to redeem his stewardship of the U.N. and bring badly needed transparency to the organization," Shays told reporters this week. "His remaining time in office should be driven by a proactive effort to get to the bottom of the oil-for-food scandal and reform the U.N. structures and processes that let it happen."
quote:The American government's arm's-length reaction may have strategic intent, administration officials said. As Powell's letter made clear, the White House needs the U.N.'s help holding the Iraqi elections scheduled for Jan. 30. Having the criticism come from other quarters provides leverage over the organization and the man the U.S. helped bring to office eight years ago.....Anaedo
There you are. The timing of the criticisms is dead perfect. I do not see any legitimacy for an Iraqi election that is not conducted under the auspices of the United Nations; with the way things were going prior to the breaking of the scandal, that was exactly what we were gonna get. Now that the man is held by the noose, let's see if he capitulates or sticks to principles.
___________________ This war of attrition on the Igbo must end now! Posts: 441 | From: california, US | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, talk of the devil himself. I am sure the plots and twists will soon become apparent to the world. My best guess is that the guy(Kofi Annan) has been arm-twisted to drop his fierce opposition to America's war on Iraq. In days to come, we are likely to begin witnessing a softening of positions and the shifting of alignments at the UN. Put this one down in the achievement column of Colin Powell!
quote:Bush Administration Breaks Silence to Back Annan
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The Bush administration expressed confidence in U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan (news - web sites) on Thursday and said he should stay in office, in a belated rebuff to demands from Republicans in Congress for his resignation.
U.S. Ambassador John Danforth called reporters together to deliver the comments, saying that he had to clarify the U.S. position after his colleagues and the media believed the United States government was not supporting Annan.
"We are expressing confidence in the secretary-general and his continuing in office," Danforth said, "No one to my knowledge has cast doubt on the personal integrity of the secretary-general. No one."
"We are not suggesting or pushing for the resignation of the secretary-general," said Danforth, adding that he was speaking for the White House and the State Department.
U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman (news, bio, voting record), a Minnesota Republican, who was later joined by five congressmen, last week called for the resignation of Annan, who has two more years in office before completing his second five-year term.
They accused him of presiding over corruption in the U.N. oil-for-food program for Iraq (news - web sites), administered by the United Nations (news - web sites) but supervised by the 15-nation Security Council.
In reaction, the 191-member U.N. General Assembly gave Annan a standing ovation on Wednesday and the leaders of Britain, France, Germany, Russia and Australia either issued statements or telephoned the secretary-general to voice support.
Previous statements by the White House and by Danforth have mainly emphasized the need for an open investigation into the scandal and Danforth repeated that on Thursday.
After Coleman's statement, President Bush neither defended Annan nor joined calls for his ouster, saying only he wanted a "full and open accounting" of the now-defunct oil-for-food program.
"The worst thing, to continue the cloud over an organization, is to give the impression that something is being hidden or that there is not total cooperation," Danforth said. "And that really is deadly in any kind of an organization and that would have to be resolved."
But he said, "Our view of the performance of the secretary-general is that he has done a good job, that he is doing a good job, that we have worked with him, that we anticipate working with him in the future. (emphasis mine)
He noted Annan's help on the crisis in the Darfur region of Sudan and on planned elections in Iraq. (emphasis mine)
Danforth also played down reports that Annan's son, Kojo, had not full disclosed his ties to a firm hired by the United Nations to inspect goods in Iraq. The younger Annan worked for the Swiss company Cotecna in West Africa.
"The son is an adult and I think generally speaking there is a perceived difference and a real difference between adult children and parents," he said.
The oil-for-food program, investigated by some five congressional committees, was launched in December 1996 and continued until last year to allow Baghdad to supply civilian goods to ordinary Iraqis, suffering under U.N. sanctions imposed in 1990.
Most of the corruption revealed so far involves illegal transfers or smuggling of oil, which the Security Council, including the United States, knew about and controlled.
But investigations, including one set up by Annan, are also looking into whether any U.N. employees received bribes from Iraq and how much U.N. staff knew about inflated contracts.
....YahooNews
___________________ This war of attrition on the Igbo must end now! Posts: 441 | From: california, US | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
