Take this hypothetical situation: You have a man overseeing one of the world’s largest humanitarian efforts. He appoints friends and family to key positions, which no one really pays much attention to at the beginning.
Then something happens which brings to light not only how unqualified they were, but they were taking advantage of the victims and lining the pockets of their friends and themselves.
Despite all the corruption that has taken place under his watch, by his own inner cricle, the man says he will lead the reforms himself.
Now there is no known proof that he had any first hand knowledge of the corruption taking place. He may simply be guilty of appointing the wrong people to the wrong positions. Or some of the rumors may be true and he was involved with all the decisions making and was personally involved and even responsible for the corruption.
Should the leader himself bare any responsibility for the lack of aid reaching the victims in a reasonable amount of time? Should he shoulder blame for the corruption of his appointees? Should he be the one to investigate the mistakes in his organization? Should he be fired?
If you believe the leader in the hypothetical situation should be fired, then you should agree with Mark Steyn’s assesment from last year that Kofi Annan should be dismissed from the UN.
While you may have thought I was speaking of George W. Bush or Michael Brown and the US government’s response to the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, I was actually talking about Kofi Annan and the Oil-for-Food scandal.
His own son Kojo was one of the largest beneficiaries of the money making scandal that enriched international bureaucrats and empowered Saddam Hussein, while hindering aid from reaching the poorest in Iraq.
While the actual Volcker Report basically gave Kofi a pass, a Congressional investiagation will include information from two UN investigators who resigned because tey felt the inquiry was trying to whitewash Kofi’s involvement.
What’s interesting is to watch the left’s reaction to the current Katrina blame game. Because George W. Bush is ultimately responsible for everything that goes on in US government, he is ultimately responsible for anything negative having to do with the response to the tragedy in the gulf coast.
But with the Oil-for-Food scandal it is all about “sharing oil-for-food blame,” according to the San Franciso Chronicle. The US is even partly to blame because we were on the Security Council, ignoring the fact that the nations who benefited most from the scandal (France, Russia and China) are also on the council and had their reasons for keeping the scam going mainly money.
I’m waiting for that same sense of outrage that seems to be directed at Bush and Brown to be directed at the Annon family since thousands of Iraqis died because Saddam remained in power and the Iraqi people did not get the help they were supposed to get from the UN.
Or maybe the left in our country really doesn’t care about Oil-for-Food because it was Arabic Iraqis who died as a result and not black and white Americans.
That may not be a fair or accurate statement, but the same inferences could be drawn since it is perfectly fine to say that Bush didn’t help New Orleans because he hates black people.