Saving Syria from Kofi Annan
In that post, Hill seemed to enjoy largely unqualified support from both President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. The result was that the U.S, in its efforts to please Pyongyang:
- Choreographed the transfer back to North Korea of some $25 million in allegedly illicit funds that had been frozen in Macau
- Took North Korea off the U.S. list of state sponsors of terror, and wined and dined their lead nuclear negotiator in New York
- Paid millions to Pyongyang for the Potemkin spectacle of North Korea blowing up a cooling tower at the Yongbyon nuelear complex
- Reopened the aid spigots to the Kim regime
- Sat for months on the information that while Hill in early 2007 was announcing his triumph of a nuclear disarmament deal with the North Koreans at the Six Party Talks, North Korea was secretly collaborating with Syria to build a clandestine nuclear reactor on the Euphrates River — a copy of Yongbyon, which is to say, basically a plutonium factory. (The Israelis destroyed the reactor with an air strike in September, 2007; the Bush administration did not confirm North Korea’s involvement, or the nature of the target, until April, 2008).
- Soft-pedaled the grotesque human rights violations of the North Korean regime
… That may not be a complete list, but perhaps it will suffice to give a sample of Chris Hill’s diplomatic style.
The upshot was that North Korea pocketed the U.S. gifts and concessions, and — with Hill urging over and over yet more talks, yet more patience — North Korea welched on the deal. As the Bush administration drew to an end, the Six-Party talks collapsed. The newly inaugurated President Barack Obama rewarded Hill for his accomplishments by posting him as ambassador to Iraq.
In mid-2009, North Korea’s government, the beneficiary of all that Six-Party “stakeholder” palaver, conducted a ballistic missile test (which they called a satellite launch, though no satellite was apparent), followed by the country’s second nuclear test.
Do we really need more of this brand of “diplomacy”? For an alternative that is robust, actually looks out for U.S. interests, and by extension probes for remedies in Syria that might actually end up saving the Syrians as well, check out John Bolton’s recent piece on “What to Do about Syria?”
Bolton wastes almost no time on Kofi Annan, noting chiefly as concerns Annan and his old fraternity that the UN “has failed, is failing, and will continue to fail to resolve the Syria conflict.” In blessed contravention of the Kofi Annan-Chris Hill model of diplomacy, Bolton notes that “Negotiations require a negotiator with something in his back pocket other than a white flag.” He urges tipping events in the right direction by focusing on “eliminating Tehran’s nuclear program,” and by firing off warning shots to Bashar Assad’s pals in Russia and China, via measures such as resuming full-scale and accelerated efforts to build a missile defense system, and withdrawing from the new START arms-control treaty — a deal that was all too flexible in Russia’s favor.
And if the old boys of the diplomatic establishment are really that desperate to find post-retirement employment for Kofi Annan, here’s an idea. Last I heard, Annan’s old handpicked executive director of Oil-for-Food, Benon Sevan, was still living on Cyprus — where he is immune to extradition to the U.S., despite his federal indictment in 2007, in the Southern District of New York, on Oil-for-Food-related charges of bribery and conspiracy to commit wire fraud. As far as I am aware, Annan has never spoken up to urge that Sevan return to New York, to face those charges. Maybe Annan could devote his diplomatic skills to a campaign aimed at persuading Sevan to return to New York, and, under oath, tell his side of the story.
“that any lasting political settlement must not be a triumph for one side or the other.” Instead, Hill urges “serious and sustained negotiations among interested international powers.” He adds, “Most importantly, all of the plan’s stakeholders then need to support Annan, publicly and privately.”
So, in other words “the negotiatiotors need to compromise, participants should be sincere, they should cover all angles of the problems at hand, everyone must have a chance to speak and then they should do what they said they would do.” Hardly profound stuff there. The hassle is why dont they follow these simple playground rules of negotiation? Don’t ask eh?
Anyway, heard Koffi makes a top notch cuppa.
He insists that neither side triumph because the simple creed of all statist salesmen everywhere is “There’s No Money In Solutions!” (Please Give Generously – AGAIN!)
The UN exists to foster and maintain conflicts, by never taking sides, but in talking its funding from all sides!
This is the difference between ‘Peace-KEEPING’ and ‘War-ENDING.’
Capisce?
If the single word for Annan is ‘resign,’ I would suggest a single word for the UN: Disband.
What I never really understood is why do we have to “solve” the Syria problem at all? Hey, here’s a thought, why don’t we let the Syrians solve the problem on their own. It would be different if the rebel group fighting Assad was firmly pro-western and a group of people devoted to seeing a democratic form of government be installed in that country. That’s not even close to who these rebels are. Odds are, if the rebels win, Syria will be worse than Egypt is right now, with the Muslim Brotherhood taking over that country. In Syria, you’ll probably have some sort of Islamist or religious fanatic mullah taking over the country, making it look more like Hezbollah than anything else. There are no good winners in Syria right now, so any western involvement would be pointless. Let them fight it out and deal with the winner. And if Libya and Egypt are any examples of the new “Arab Spring,” then we certainly don’t want a repeat of that in Syria. The sunnis and shia in that country have been slaughtering each other for centuries. Maybe it’s about time we just stand back and allow them to figure out their own problems.
Maybe it’s about time we just stand back and allow them to figure out their own problems.
Yeah, for the whole damn hot mess called the world.
Time to stop meddling and tweaking.
No surprise, since the author is former U.S. diplomat Christopher Hill…As for Chris Hill, who now urges unqualified support for whatever Annan next conjures up for Syria
Couldn’t Kofi had had the dignity to just fade off into the sunset when his UN gig was up ? Besides impotence and incompetence, there was all that Oil For Fraud stuff with his son Kojo.
Christopher (about whom I know little) earned my eternal contempt when he bent over and spread ‘em for the North Koreans.
Annan’s old handpicked executive director of Oil-for-Food, Benon Sevan, was still living on Cyprus — where he is immune to extradition to the U.S., despite his federal indictment in 2007, in the Southern District of New York, on Oil-for-Food-related charges of bribery and conspiracy to commit wire fraud.
The guy whose aged wealthy aunt “fell down” an elevator shaft shortly after he returned to Cyprus and Sevan inherited her money and proceeded to acquire a new apartment.
A charming cast of characters, all the way around.
Why is Anan on the job when they have Mugabe?
These bastards will never get one goddamn dime out of me for this…and woe unto the IRS agent who tries to….note to self: buy more ammo at Walmart this weekend
Why are you guys so hard on him? He is just trying to get everyone to stop fighting. He almost has it right but just does not really understand the Middle East.
Anyone who has been to the middle east knows that everyone claims to produce the best hummus. What he needs to do is organize all of the groups, Sunni, Christians, Alawite, Al Queda…everyone involved. They each need to bring the very best hummus they can make to a special conference at UN headquarters where the winner will be decided by a General Assembly vote. The winner then gets to rule Syria.
Claudia, Syria and Kofi deserve each other.
Summary of Kofi Annan’s CV:
Rwanda.
Darfur.
Syria.
?????
Say no more, this perfectly captures the insanity of our current internationalist mindset. Why we are making the slightest efforts to please North Korea, rather than them being desparate not to annoy us, says it all.
Ok Ms. Rosett, we get the idea. Kofi Anan, as former Secretary General of the UN, is a terrible diplomat, not the right man for the job. I don’t disagree. But who do you then suggest is the right person for the job? The guy with the Swedish Chef mustache who has precisely zero foreign policy accomplishments to show for his years of “public service” (what a waste of taxpayers dollars)? No, of course not. It must be easier to throw stones than to actually make a productive recommendation. That saves having to actually think about the problems and the solutions. Thanks!
Ms Rosett—Hurrah for your spot on analysis on the incredulity of Mr Annan brokering peace in Syria.
No one can question Mr Annan’s complete bias against western interests, and in particular his whole-hearted contempt for American diplomatic initiatives.
This man is not to be trusted as the Iraq-for-oil coverup of outright corruption demonstrated.
Mr Annan is the United Nation’s poster boy for One World Government.
Perhaps that explains why the US State Department and progressive elitist elements of the itelligensia promote his diplomatic bias.