I stand corrected. When I suggested that at the UN wrong-doing carries no penalties, I should have qualified that. While the UN-appointed inquiry led by Paul Volcker managed to conduct a $35 million investigation into the multi-billion dollar UN Oil-for-Food scams without leading to the in-house punishment, let alone the public prosecution, of a single one of the hundreds of UN international staffers involved in running the program, the US Attorney of the Southern District of New York in exploring a few of the UN’s back alleys has had somewhat different results.
Today prosecutors announced the indictment of a UN staffer, Sanjaya Bahel, saying Bahel used his influence to swing millions worth of UN contracts to Indian companies in exchange for valuable New York real estate. Bahel denies any wrong-doing. He is a citizen of India; serving currently — or at least until today — as the head of the UN postal administration and from 1998-2003 was head of commodity procurement within the UN Procurement Department (which helps the UN spend your tax dollars).
This follows the indictment on July 26 of 44 members of an alleged international narcotics-trafficking organization, which prosecutors say smuggled more than 25 tons of the leafy stimulant called khat into the U.S. — a quantity worth more than $10 million, and the biggest khat bust in U.S. history. Prosecutors charged that one of the “leaders/organizers” of these activities was a Somali named Osman Osman, “who was employed at the United Nations” and “used the United Nations diplomatic pouch to smuggle khat into the United States.” Osman has pleaded not guilty.
That follows the conviction in New York’s Southern District on July 13 of South Korean businessman Tongsun Park, on charges of conspiracy to launder money and act as an unregistered agent of Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in Saddam’s efforts to corrupt the Oil-for-Food program from the start.
That follows the indictment last September, in New York’s Southern District, of the head of the UN General Assembly budget oversight committee, a Russian named Vladimir Kuznetsov, whom prosecutors have charged with money-laundering involving “hundreds of thousands of dollars in criminal proceeds obtained by a co-conspirator (“CC-1″) who served as a procurement officer at the United Nations from at least mid-1985 through June 2005.” Kuznetsov has pleaded not guilty.
That follows the guilty plea in the Southern District in August of last year of Alexander Yakovlev, a Russian and former UN procurement official who appears to be the co-conspirator described as CC-1 in the Kuznetsov indictment above. Yakovlev pled guilty to conspiracy, wire fraud and money laundering.
Is this all a sign of a thorough cleanup at the UN? Or a mere sample of what lies beneath the surface? For the $5.3 billion or so the U.S. is now spending every year on the UN, not to mention the trust Americans still place in the organization, we deserve much clearer insights and answers than UN “transparency” allows.
Ms. Rosett, I work at the Secretariat in a mid-level management position. I’ve not been here long, and I’m not staying long either. Here’s why.
First, it has been a disillusionment to learn that the the general assembly runs UN and the majority clearly prefers a UN that provides their diplomats with an unearned international platform, keeps the international community – such as it is – from interfering in their sordid affairs, supplies jobs for its citizens at the expense of Western nations, and will continue as an otherwise powerless organization.
Second, I do not believe in the integrity of the organization, nor in its intent or ability to fix itself. While I am not placed where I have personally witnessed serious malfeasance, I regularly see so much petty graft, goldbricking, and low-level malfeasance that I have a hard time believing the Secretary General when he protests that the more serious allegations are not real.
Third, my lack of faith in the organization encourages suspicions that cover ups for things like oil-for-food go very high, perhaps to the S-G’s office. Hamlet was right to be dismayed to find “that one may smile and smile and be a villain.” I think the Volcker Commission findings could be the top of the tip of the iceberg.
Fourth, from a managerial perspective, the place is not organized to accomplish work, rather to provide sinecures for international drones. There is no meaningful discipline among the workforce other than what honest individuals themselves bring to their desks every day, and those poor good souls are outnumbered. Is there a discipline process for rank and file miscreants? Technically yes, but the process is so laborious and the rules so byzantine that nothing managerially useful comes of it. It’s a better tactic to assign non-performing staffers to meaningless jobs where they cannot harm your department. There is no shortage of meaningless jobs.
Fifth, the resignation of Mr Burnham says a lot to me. He is the kind of leader that a healthy organization would support with enthusiasm. At UN he was met with sullen resistance.
Bottom line (imagine! somone at UN who thinks in terms of results!) – I simply cannot accept that UN will fix its problems or, in fact, discipline anyone, including its most senior people. When it may appear that it is doing so, keep you eye on the person and see where they eventually re-emerge.
You are on the right track(s) – don’t stop.
bourne2y, It’s nice to hear someone from the inside of the UN give an assessment of how pathetic and insidious the organization is – even if it has to be done confidentially. I would be thrilled if someone like you collected as much damaging info as you could and blew the place up (figuratively, of course) upon quitting. I’m sure Fox News would be more than happy to report such a thing, even if the MSM wouldn’t. I’ll keep an eye out here on Ms. Rosett’s site to see if you have anything more to say.
I appreciate the report that individuals are responsible for the scandals that have plagued the UN. The Volcker report emphasized the responsibility of the UN’s permanent members equally with the office of the Secretariat in any procurement scandal.
Sadly, your article implies that the U.S. pays and pays and pays into the UN system. You neglect however to note that the U.S. benefits more in terms of procurment contracts than any other government. NY Mayor Gulliani even counter anti-UN arguments during his tenure by noting that NYC alone earns about $3 BILLION a year by hosting the UN – more than the U.S. pays in in annual dues.
Let’s be balanced. The UN members states (not some mythical unitary UN) allow corruption in the system to continue. The U.S. taxpayers score big in terms of GDP as the host country.
So, Tondro, please clarify your position.
Are you saying that because the US benefits so much from a corrupt UN, US should not be so quick to criticize it?