 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Witness Testimony
The Honorable Jeff Flake (AZ-06)
United Nations Oil for Food Program Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for your invitation to participate in this hearing. The abuses under the United Nations Oil-for-Food Program demand serious consideration and investigation by Congress and the Executive branch of our government. We must have assurance of a meaningful investigation, hold wrong-doers accountable, fix institutional problems leading to the abuses, and compensate victims of the abuse to the degree possible. The fact that you are holding this hearing today demonstrates appropriate and necessary concern. This is the third hearing in as many committees in the House, and I am aware of three separate Congressional investigations into abuses under the Oil-for-Food Program. Congress is uniquely positioned to influence the UN and work toward accountability and resolution of the issue. I hope we see many more hearings on this important subject After the first Gulf War, Saddam Hussein agreed to multilateral economic sanction on Iraq. Under the sanctions, Saddam lived comfortably, as dictators do, while his people starved and died for lack of basic medicines and other necessities. Using the suffering of the Iraqi people as a pretext, Saddam appealed for relief and managed to dictate many of the terms of the Oil-for-Food program. According to the General Accounting Office, over a period of about eight years, Saddam realized over $10 billion in illicit gains under the program. Meanwhile, too many Iraqis continued to suffer from severe depravation. Like perhaps some of you, I have been to Iraq and seen the palaces and the stashes of Saddam and his sons. Saddam built dozens of palaces and built up a fleet of Mercedes-Benz vehicles with revenues that were intended to be used for the purchase of food, medicine, and other basic provisions for the Iraqi people. As a result of the GAO report and the initiation of an Iraqi investigation this year, we have seen growing interest, concern, and contempt for the wrongs committed in the name of Oil-for-Food. Part of me is mildly surprised that we have not seen more immediate and general outrage. Then again, my skeptical side understands that subscription to the stated intentions and objectives of the UN leads some to overlook what they rightly do not forgive in the conduct of their own governments. For example, when corporate scandals in the United States came to light a few years ago, the outrage in Congress moved this body to action more quickly than we nearly ever have. We churned out expansive new laws and regulations intended to impose accountability on the wrong-doers and establish a more transparent system. Without diminishing the seriousness of those scandals, I submit that the UN Oil-for-Food scandal is much worse, and unfortunately, the victims of this fraud lost more than their retirement savings and portfolio values. It sickens me that the UN and its ardent supporters excuse the Oil-for-Food fraud because some degree of good resulted from the program. Such reasoning would suggest forgiveness for corporate criminals guilty of plundering the assets of thousands, just because some people were employed and paid under their watch. But again, we are talking about much more than financial "winners" and losers. We are talking about roughly 270 people who scammed their way to financial gain--including Saddam and his regime, UN employees, other foreign officials, business people and political entities--while ordinary Iraqis were left destitute and felt the mortal consequences. Iraqis went without adequate food and medicine, resulting in many deaths, while 270 people scammed the Oil-for-Food system. Regardless of how may Iraqis may have been helped, there is absolutely no justification for the fraudulent gain of some at the price of the basic necessities and the lives of others. Americans and their elected representatives espouse the principles of accountability at all levels of their government, but some are not insisting on accountability from the administrators and participants in the UN Oil-for-Food Program. Americans and their elected representatives espouse transparency in government, but some do not expect the same of the UN and its programs. Americans and their elected representatives are sensitive about how their tax dollars are spent, but some are numb to the misuse of their tax dollars by the UN. Fortunately, Mr. Chairman, your subcommittee and a growing number of people in this country, as well as outside the U.S. and Iraq, are beginning to demand a thorough and meaningful investigation into the Oil-for-Food fraud. As evidence of the growing concern in Congress, I would point to companion bills in the House and Senate. Senator Ensign introduced S. 2389 and I introduced H.R. 4284, which has the support of 61 cosponsors with more being added to the list regularly. These bills establish basic criteria with regard to investigations, accountability, and reparation. They are not specific to any one of the several investigations that are or may be conducted, but they do establish reasonable requirements of cooperation and accountability from the UN. Specifically, the legislation would require the withholding of a portion of United States assessed contributions to the United Nations until the President certifies that the United Nations is cooperating in the investigation of the United Nations Oil-for-Food Program. Until the President certifies to Congress that the UN is meeting criteria spelled out in the bill, the U.S. would withhold ten percent of assessed contributions in 2005 and twenty percent of assessed contributions in 2006. We would withhold the assessed funding because it goes to the general budget of the UN-as opposed to voluntary funding that goes to programs like UNICEF or peace-keeping operations. The U.S. contributes twenty-two percent of the UN's budget. To withhold a portion of one category of contributions is a moderate approach, but one that we believe will be effective in ensuring that investigations result in accountability and transparency in the future.
The Presidential certification criteria contained in the bill are the following: 2. The UN Secretary General must have formally confirmed that the UN will not assert inviolability of UN papers and internal records related to the program; 3. The Secretary General must have authorized the release of UN documents, including those in the possession of contractors, to law enforcement officials of any member state; 4. The UN must have waived diplomatic immunity of UN officials from the judicial process in the U.S. for civil or criminal acts under federal or state law; 5. Any UN official who benefited from program must have reimbursed the full amount that was received improperly. This legislation is based on the Helms-Biden approach to reforms at the UN--an effort that received strong support in Congress as a step in the right direction. Much more can be said of the history and background, the nature and design of the fraud, the results of the abuse, the investigative efforts thus far, and the risks of not acting quickly. I'm sure that other witnesses here today will address these points. But after all these points are made and debated, I believe the fact remains that the Oil-for-Food scandal begs for immediate, meaningful, and decisive action. Too many people suffered under Saddam's reign and were short-changed, sometimes fatally so, by the abuses of the Oil-for-Food program. Delaying or confusing the issue and how to proceed will mean continued stone-walling and the loss of key information. Our efforts should not be read as an attempt to weaken the UN, but rather as an effort to establish the kind of accountability, transparency, and effectiveness that we expect from institutions and governments within the U.S. Having established such underpinnings at the UN, Americans, Iraqis, and others will be able to take more confidence in the organization. I hope that we in Congress can provide the means to a complete and real resolution to the Oil-for-Food scandal. I thank you again for holding this hearing and working on this important issue. |
|||||||||||
|
