If you track the UN through the Kofi era – first Rwanda and Darfur, then oil-for-food and then this new report that the investigation into the Hariri assassination has been doctored – you see a record that is sinister indeed. I hope the Secretary General’s motivation in all this is either knee-jerk anti-Americanism or greed or some combination of the two. Otherwise I am at a loss. I would have no idea why the man looked the other way twice from the slaughter of citizens of his native Africa, then enabled the looting of the Iraqi people to the tune of billions of dollars and now seems to be, at the very least, hand maiden to a coverup of the homicidal Alawite regime in Syria. Gross incompetence can’t explain it. The behavior is too consistent.
But as for the Syrian situation, perhaps Kofi’s track record has become so embarrassing that this time no one will pay attention to a word he says. Liberating the Syrian people from the sadistic Assads is too important. Let’s make sure this interesting tidbit from the Times report is not ignored:
Mr Annan had pledged repeatedly through his chief spokesman, Stephane Dujarric, that he would not change a word of the report by Detlev Mehlis, a German prosecutor. But computer tracking showed that the final edit began at about 11.38am on Thursday – a minute after Herr Mehlis began a meeting with Mr Annan to present his report. The names of Maher al-Assad, General Shawkat and the others were apparently removed at 11.55am, after the meeting ended.
At a press conference yesterday Herr Mehlis insisted that Mr Annan had not pressurised him into making changes. “No one outside of the report team influenced these changes and no changes whatsoever were suggested by the Secretary-General,” he said.
For the record, a pdf of the Mehlis report.
Mehlis’ report should offer Germany a rare moment of pride, and its especially ironic to have a German point a finger of accusation against a Baathist regime – Baathism being a secular pan-Arabist fascism with roots going back to WWII and indeed Germany.
Would we had done as well with our 9/11 Commission, where the key truths were never inserted in the first.
Mehlis’ report should offer Germany a rare moment of pride, and it’s especially ironic to have a German point a finger of accusation against a Baathist regime – Baathism being a secular pan-Arabist fascism with roots going back to WWII and indeed Germany.
Would we had done as well with our 9/11 Commission, where the key truths were never inserted in the first place.
“…I have no idea why the man looked twice…”
Surely you’re joking. The guy is just another crook, little different from Saddam. He doesn’t give a crap who dies in Africa or anywhere else, as long as it’s not him or a buddy or his. He simply does not care. He’s in it for the money, just like most crooks.
HenryB is right – people only join these supranational organisations for the tax-free jobs for life and retirement schemes. They are not remotely interested in anyone’s welfare. There is a guy working in the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation who is paid $150k per year to make the atrium look nice. He gets free first class air travel home every year etc. etc. – enough in his package to feed thousands of Africans every year. You could even feed Jacques Chirac for three days on that.
I think the basis for Annan’s thinking is idealism, similar to Jimmy Carter’s, and he believes what dictators or their representatives tell him. He believes in the status quo, that all foreign policy issues can be resolved with negotiations, that trust does not require verification. I think he also believes that you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette, or in this case that one has to accept a little corruption and brutality to avoid “instability”.
I am with Henry B and dubhail–Greed, pure and simple. Any other explanations would assume Annan has some type of moral compass–He is a thug in a pin striped three piece suit. Not a dime’s worth of difference between Kofi and Idi Amin, except Amin wasnt a hypocrite.
Pajamas Media needs a mole at the UN. Preferably a Sys Admin who can tell us from which/whose desktop the report was redacted.
Speaking of which, where’s the Diplomad these days, Roger? Another candidate for PJM.
I strongly second thibaud’s suggestion to sign up the Diplomad. He will no doubt be much harder to find than the Manolo, but I hope you all will at least try to get him.
There’s another side to the greed motivation. That is the greed for power and prestige. Annan is seen by many as one of the most powerful and prestigious of men. What’s a few million dead Africans or starving Iraqis to compete with that?
I think Kofi just takes the course of least resistance.
I have neither sympathy nor respect for Annan. But after looking at the excerpt over at Taranto’s Best of the Web Today I wonder if Annan just thought the evidence cited was too weak to accuse a head of state directly.
The lead-in is “One witness of Syrian origin but resident in Lebanon, who claims to have worked for the Syrian intelligence services in Lebanon, has stated that approximately two weeks after the adoption of Security Council…”
I didn’t read the entire report. Maybe there is something else that gave the investigators the confidence to name names. And I have no doubt, instinctively, that Assad was at the top of the loop. But maybe Annan was as unimpressed as I was by what was stated as evidence.
ROGER -
Is the pdf to the unedited version?
Totten’s latest piece (since there is no longer commenting due to the anti Israeli trolls) does not mention whether or not the Lebanese are aware of the doctoring by Annan, with the likely consent and covering after the fact, by Mehlis.
1) Can Totten comment on that? Perhaps you have a secret protocols zionist passway to him.. all kidding aside and can place your answer here email me.
2) Is the pdf the doctored or un-doctored version?
3) Has anyone questioned that troll Annan about it?
4) Why do you and others think he doctored it? Just the obvious, that he is beholdent to the Arab states? I wonder if Tony Badran and Lebanon Profile could comment on why?
5) I wonder if the US State Dept consented to the doctoring and then to use that as a leverage against Syria, that or else they would fully expose them? This seems assinine to me, but you know, I wouldn’t put it past our State Dept. even if Condi is now there.
Thoughts from anyone who is knowledgeable about this would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Mike