The Volcker Committee report on the United Nations Oil-for-Food Program has certainly seen some heads roll since its publication. But eyeballs also should roll at some of the antics taken by governments around the world in response to the report.
Consider India, where Foreign Minister Natwar Singh resigned under pressure after he was named in the internal UN report, which found that some 2,200 companies made illicit payments worth $2.4 billion to the regime of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.Then, just a day after Natwar had to step down, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh came out in his support, saying that the Volcker panel’s findings were “unsubstantiated” and that there was no evidence against Natwar.
A judicial inquiry and the fact-finding mission will bring out the truth, Manmohan said. As for Natwar’s continuation in the government’s core committees, however, Manmohan said: “We’ll see. A decision will be taken soon.”
Hasty departure
With so much damage already done, and on “unsubstantiated” grounds, one wonders why Natwar left in such haste, why he is not immediately reinstated, and-above all-who will make the decision regarding his political future.
By contrast, Australia has handled its apparent involvement in the scandal with somewhat better grace. Indeed, the Australian government should be commended for its efforts to separate the wheat of truth from the chaff of mere accusation in the Volcker report.
The federal government has not ruled out a royal commission into the scandal involving Australia’s wheat exporter funneling $300 million (Aus.) to the Saddam regime.
That view is a concession to the opposition Labor Party that has been pushing for a royal commission since Volcker’s investigation found Australian Wheat Board Ltd. provided kickbacks to the Iraqi regime.
Investigators found the AWB did not knowingly fund the regime through a murky deal with a Jordanian transport company that was a front for the Iraqi government.
Bribe or fee?
AWB admitted making the payments to the Jordanian trucking company under the Oil-for-Food Program but insists it thought they were costs for moving its wheat around Iraq and not kickbacks to Saddam. But the investigation’s final report, released Oct. 28, found AWB should have known its money was ending up in Saddam’s hands in a huge evasion of UN sanctions imposed after the 1991 Gulf War.
“We will establish an inquiry that can fulfill the requirements that have been indicated...by the UN and give comfort to the people of Australia that nothing untoward has happened in this regard and that the laws of Australia haven’t been contravened,” said Deputy Prime Minister Mark Vaile. “The government, I’m sure over the course of the next couple of days, will finalize the position in terms of both the structure and nature of the inquiry and the terms of reference,” he said. “We’re not ruling anything in or out.” ✦