US Probe Australian Wheat Cheats

THE chairman of a key US Senate committee investigating the UN oil-for-food scandal has asked Australia's former ambassador to the US to explain why he "unequivocally dismissed" allegations of AWB kickbacks to Saddam Hussein's regime.

Government credibility still on line
SADDAM Hussein and his henchmen manipulated the UN oil-for-food program to "peddle influence and reward friends around the world" and "to reap billions and billions" from the people of Iraq. Perhaps the money he stole has funded the insurgency which has cost thousands of lives in Iraq since the war to remove him. These are not our allegations. They are statements made last November by US senator Norm Coleman whose committee has investigated the worldwide rort.
(Note: RORT is a delightful Australian term for ripping off a system.)

Norm Coleman must be reeling with the latest revelations stirred by Australia’s inquiry into the Oil for Food fiasco. At best Coleman took his eye off the ball, at worst he was nobbled not just by Australian interests but by his own administration.

Lets go back to: CNN.com - British MP denies oil-for-food charges - May 17, 2005
May 17, 2005 Senate panel probing alleged corruption in the U.N. oil-for-food program in Iraq. Galloway, an outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, called the panel's investigation the "mother of all smokescreens" used to divert attention from the "pack of lies" that led to the 2003 invasion.
"I told the world that Iraq, contrary to your claims, did not have weapons of mass destruction. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that Iraq had no connection to al Qaeda. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that Iraq had no connection to the atrocity on 9/11, 2001," he told the panel's Republican chairman, Sen. Norm Coleman of Minnesota.

Galloway was probably always a non-issue, but he represented everything the Bush Administration perceived as evil; that is he disagreed with them. Grandstanding with Galloway was no picnic.
Coleman, the former chief prosecutor and solicitor general of Minnesota found Galloway open and direct, and feisty. That particular inquiry generated copious headlines, but little substance.

Back to the Australian angle: That AWB officials were anxious to avoid appearing before Senator Coleman's investigative committee in 2004 is not surprising. That the Howard Government tried to shield them is.
But in the lead-up to the 2004 election, Australian ambassador Michael Thawley lobbied Senator Coleman, arguing AWB officers should be left alone, that making them appear would help their competitors, that the company had done nothing wrong in Iraq.
While Mr Thawley undoubtedly acted honestly, and according to his instructions, his involvement raises questions of what Foreign Minister Alexander Downer's department was doing in directing diplomats to defend what the Government keeps saying is a private company.

No doubt Coleman will find it ‘out of order’ to call on former ambassador Thawley. The simple fact is, he was not acting as a private individual, but as an instrument of the Australian Government.
There is no real reason to expect Thawley to know anymore that those things he was instructed to say. What he thought, or even knew, really has no relevance. His bosses are the only ones who can give Coleman any definitive explanations. They are Prime Minister Howard, Deputy PM and Trade Minister Vaile and Foreign Minister Downer.

Now a bit of advice to the hapless Senator from Minnesota:
The US has been played for idiots in this affair. Ego has blinded Bush et al to just how slimy these three toads really are. They are past masters at dodging bullets and trading on lies.
Yes Norm, they are probably guilty as hell, but you and the whole weight of the US administration will never nail them. My best guess is the ‘best friends’ of US, in the Pacific region are about to become their fiercest enemy, trade being the weapon of choice.
They will run you ragged like a bunch of pesky terriers, yapping and snapping. I guess it is like judo politics in the end. The US might have the weight, but that is rarely enough against a nimble, wily opponent.
Oh, and norm, watch your back at home too. You were probably warned off this trail once, and there are no doubt far more powerful folk with a lot to protect. I’m sure they use that old saying where you come from Norm: If you sup with the devil, use a long spoon.