US Suggests Honoring Past Iraq Oil, Food Contracts (UN Food for Oil)

Reuters ^ | May 2, 2003

[may18]

This is what pi**es me off

The french obstructed the action at every step.

The americans brits aussies do the dirty work.

Then the french, who should be quiet think that they should somehow be rewarded.

The easiest way to avoid sanctions is for iraq to sell their oil to usa, uk, australia etc

[MadIvan]

I think Blair and Bush should say tomorrow that we're ignoring the sanctions. Full trade to be resumed with Iraq immediately. US and British companies will fill in the gap that the Russians, French and Germans impose on themselves by insisting the sanctions stay. And then they look like the fat lot of idiots that they are. ;)

Regards, Ivan

[Shermy]

Mr. Negroponte is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the American Academy of Diplomacy. He is former chairman of the French-American Foundation.

DANG, you're right!! Bad news indeed (I hope not). Will he trade future "friendships" and cocktail parties to do the right thing? Let's hope so.

Here's a bio I found, a little dated:

JOHN D. NEGROPONTE, a retired ambassador, is Executive Vice President of Global Markets, the McGraw-Hill Companies. He is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations in New York City, Chairman of the French-American Foundation, Co-President of the U.S.-Mexico Commission for Educational and Cultural Exchange, and a Fellow of the Foreign Policy Association. As a member of the career Foreign Service, Ambassador Negroponte served as Special Coordinator for Post-1999 U.S. presence in Panama, Ambassador to the Philippines, Ambassador to Mexico, Ambassador to Honduras, and as Deputy Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs.

[thinktwice]

The U.S. proposals would end the oil-for-food program, which puts Iraq's oil revenues into a U.N.-administered fund out of which are paid suppliers of food, medicine and other goods. The account holds $12 billion --

The American/British way is to handle this with common sense and honor

So the best course would be to let the UN program lapse on June 3rd while seeing to it that legitimate creditors are paid from the UN account and that remaining funds are placed in a Swiss Trust account dedicated to the people of Iraq.

After June 3rd, control of Iraqi assets should be placed in the hands of a "coalition" appointed board with representatives, one each, from the United States, Britain and Iraq; with that board mandated to honorably manage Iraqi foreign business affairs -- through that Swiss Trust account -- until control can be passed to a legitimately elected government of Iraq.

[swheats]

While the United States could just let the oil-for-food program lapse on June 3 by vetoing any resolution to renew it, such an action could raise legal problems and possibly deter multinational companies from doing business there.

The U.S. should allow the lapse. And the UN needs to show us the money. Open their books.

[DannyTN]

"While the United States could just let the oil-for-food program lapse on June 3 by vetoing any resolution to renew it, such an action could raise legal problems and possibly deter multinational companies from doing business there."

We should let it lapse. Who are we to honor past contracts. It's not our resources. It's not our country. Let the new Iraqi's decide if they are going to burden all that debt.

[joesnuffy]

Dont listen to the globalists ...they made this mess in the first place ..as per usual...

[agarrett]

  While I largely agree, I would make one addition to your "trust board." Get an Iraqi voice on it right from the beginning. This does several things for us. First, it provides legitimicy - it shows we really intend to turn this over to the Iraqis, and we're proceeding towards that goal. Second, it allows us to start giving some power to a transitional authority of our choice - it could provide a nice boost to the INC, as an example. Finally, it's low risk, since the Iraqi vote is still only 1 in 4, but it provides an easy precedent for later expanding that voice.

Drew Garrett

[agarrett]

  OK, that'll teach me to read twice before posting. You already had Iraq on there. I'd have had my list as U.S., Britain, Australia, and Iraq - I just glossed over your third, and assumed it would be the same as mine.

  Oops,

Drew Garrett

[meenie]

Why are the UK and the US determined to give away the advantage their armed forces achieved? This is worse than FDR at Yalta. Is the new world order more important than their nation's sovereignty and blood? It seems so, if Blair and Bush would even consider this.

[browardchad]

Negoponte's nomination as U.S. Ambassador was also vehemently opposed by the Senate Dems, due to his supposed involvement with (Reagan's) Iran/Contra -- before 9/11. Afterward, he was quietly voted in.

This article is from Reuters (and therefore suspect). It's not clear what "contracts" would be honored. We need more info.

[LurkedLongEnough]

Reuters. We'll see how the story gets spun elsewhere.

I had some lovely UK relatives visiting me this week, and they told me that "most" Brits "assume" that Pres Bush is a liar and Tony Blair is toast. Umm, yeah. These particular UKers (university-affiliated), anyway, have a totally different way of looking at the world than we. It's very confusing to me how they can make such pronouncements and believe them.

Seriously, I'm much more worried about the World Bank involvement than the Reuters speculation right now.

[Shermy]

have a totally different way of looking at the world than we.

How so?

Seriously, I'm much more worried about the World Bank involvement than the Reuters speculation right now.

I'm guessing that the choice of the World Bank and IMF was to get the money out of French, etc. banks, and to avoid the outcry and favortism to be alleged if the money were shifted to US, Brit and Spanish banks.

We'll see what the Iraqis do in the future. I'm depressed about the lack of Iraqi voices and protests over the UN hold on its money. It's their money after all.

[bart99]

Well heck..... I'm confused. I don't know if this is a good or bad idea. I like the lifting of sanctions.... I like the release of $12 Billion dollars...... but not to Russia and France.

I think I'd like the USA to just VETO anything France, Germany, or Russia support - just on general principles..... and also to basically screw them. And the UN can bite. I could care less about making friends there. 150 countries will STILL hate us, no matter what we do. Let's take care of Iraq with the help of the 30 - 40 countries that want to help, and screw the UN.

[bart99]

"Get an Iraqi voice on it right from the beginning. This does several things for us. First, it provides legitimicy"

---

No one yet speaks for Iraq, and may not for many months...... honest elections and all that stuff take time.

[bart99]

" I'm depressed about the lack of Iraqi voices and protests over the UN hold on its money. It's their money after all."

---

Shermy - don't be depressed. You sound like Daschele. *L* Besides, as I posted earlier, the Iraqis don't have a representative to speak for them yet.... not for the country. That'll take a while. Free elections and all that. *s*

[MatthewViti]

"No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian Initiation."

--David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

This program has been a fraud and boondoggle that benefited primarily the UN bureaucracy, France, and Germany. IMO, the USA should declare it null and void, but I expected something like this. Too bad.