Senate Accuses French, Brititish Politicians in Oil-for-Food Scandal

The US Senate's Government Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations has alleged that the UN Oil-for-Food program benefited Charles Pasqua, former French interior minister, and George Galloway, MP, the recently elected independent who was tossed from the Labour Party for his anti-war stance. Messrs. Pasqua and Galloway both said the US Senate was wrong, professing their innocence. Or as Mr. Galloway put it, "This cannot possibly be called an investigation. This is a lickspittle Republican committee, acting on the wishes of George W. Bush." Somebody's lying.

The entire report is called "Report on Oil Allocations Granted to Charles Pasqua & George Galloway. The 22-page document details the evidence against the two men, but the title itself suggest something of a witch-hunt. Some 270 people received oil allocations that would allow them to act as middlemen in selling Iraqi oil to generate funds to buy food of the Iraqi people during the Saddamite regime's waning years. The report has seen fit to deal with just these two. Moreover, as Reuters noted, "the report does not provide evidence of bank accounts showing the two men actually received funds." Absence of a bank deposit receipt doesn't prove innocence, but it is hard to believe that Mr. Galloway or Mr. Pasqua could have become oil millionaires when they were being watched by the west's intelligence services.

What is more troubling is the sources the Senate subcommittee does have. A quick read through the footnotes (which rarely gets done by journalists shows a disturbing fact -- either the evidence is media report or documents from the Saddamite regime, which the US maintains was lying to the world throughout the period. For example, a subcommittee interview of Taha Yassin Ramadan might sound like a good source, until one realizes that fellow was Saddam Hussein's vice president. Is he likely to tell the truth or what the American want to hear? Or consider "memorandum of Interview of former regime official by US Treasury Iraqi Financial Asset Team" -- in what capacity was the witness a part of the regime?

This is not to say the either man is innocent. If a name is on the list of 270 who got oil allocations from the Saddamite regime, that person has some explaining to do. But it must be remembered that this was a legal activity under UN auspices. What has the Senate upset is the use the Saddamites made of giving such allocations to those who might be able to get the sanctions lifted or who were pro-Iraq in the run-up to the war.

Suppose the two are guilty of accepting the vouchers and turning a profit. Mr. Pasqua noted in his response to the report, he had no responsibility in the French government since 1995. That doesn't seem to be a very effective bribe. And Mr. Galloway has said, "I have never traded in a barrel of oil or any vouchers for it." He recently won a libel case against the Daily Telegraph for L1.6 million over these exact charges. Moreover, he has asked the Senate subcommittee to provide evidence, but the committee only invited him to give evidence after the report came out. God help the Senate; Mr. Galloway came up through the rowdy House of Commons and not the staid US upper chamber. He might not stand on ceremony to tell his side of things, and Washington hasn't seen real dissent in quite a while.


© Copyright 2005 by The Kensington Review, J. Myhre, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent.
Produced using Fedora Linux.

Home