U.S. Officials Approved Oil-for-Food Contracts

CNSNews.com reports that former U.S. National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft supports U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan. It reported, "While some in Congress want Annan to resign because of the U.N.'s Oil for Food program scandal, Scowcroft last week said the secretary general's critics are misplacing the blame." Scowcroft said,
"Let me just say ... that this broad oil-for-peace program was not under the secretary general, it was under the [U.N.] Security Council, formed as a committee, which oversaw the contracts and so on and so forth, and that is where the primary responsibility for any lapses lies."

Richard Lessner of the American Conservative Union countered,  "It's basically saying that no one is responsible, no one is to be held accountable. If I'm not mistaken, didn't [Annan] appoint the officials who ran the Oil-for-Food program? But he had nothing to do with it? He only ... hand-picked those who ran that corrupt program."

Sorry, Richard, but Scowcroft has a point. The U.N. Security Council not only oversaw but approved the contracts. So if Annan should go, so should the officials at the U.S. Mission to the U.N. who approved those contracts.

Let's have a full-blown investigation.  As we noted, "It was under [Ambassador Madeleine] Albright as U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. that Linda Shenwick, the budget analyst at the U.S. Mission, was harassed and eventually fired because she was raising alarms about waste, fraud and abuse in U.N. programs. The public interest law firm Judicial Watch defended Shenwick, who had to sue the State Department for damages for persecuting her. Curiously, the Colin Powell State Department hired Clinton lawyer Gregory Craig to defend itself against Shenwick. There was a settlement, but Shenwick was not allowed to return to the U.S. Mission. Did Albright suspect that Shenwick would uncover the oil-for-food scandal..."

Why didn't the Bush Administration put her back in her position at the U.S. Mission?