Why Shoot the messenger?
Paul Vocker, former US Federal Bank President (before Alan Greenspan) is a distinguished gentleman and definitely not a politician. He has done his job as professionaly as possible. As recently as the Enron scandal, he conducted investigation into Arthur Andersen consulting and this time around the UN's Iraq Oil for Food program.
A little background will help understand the Natwar singh link. While Iraq was banished by the UN security council, a little commercial window was opened by the UN. The little window let Iraq barter Oil for Food at a price determined by UN. Since the little window was not enough for Iraq, the president of the country, in Capitalism terms cut deals with various traders who were hungry for oil. As the rest of the world is cut out of the Iraqi oil right now, the US traders were out of the Iraqi oil then. The political power brokers or the lobby groups always serve in the middle ground between businessmen of the world and the respective governments.
The US govt. cut out of Iraqi oil business in the last decade was gunning for some reason to get in and in the pre-text of WMD, they eventually got in. Now that the reason is not valid anymore the US government was looking for some other reason to throw at the world. So they dug this up and hence the report. However this wouldn't justify Iraqi Invasion. Who will dig the current spate of contracts being handed out by the US backed Iraqi government? There got to be another conqueror to do that! We all know that Winners write history. This is exactly what is happening in the saga of Paul Vocker report and Natwar Singh.
Even if Natwar singh or whoever is accused of in the report has done some deals, it is only as condemnable as the current political power (both Iraq and US). They are businessmen, lobbyists and politicians and they play their role according to the situation. In US terms they are power brokers and entrepreuners.
Why shoot the messenger or blame the bearer of bad tidings?
A little background will help understand the Natwar singh link. While Iraq was banished by the UN security council, a little commercial window was opened by the UN. The little window let Iraq barter Oil for Food at a price determined by UN. Since the little window was not enough for Iraq, the president of the country, in Capitalism terms cut deals with various traders who were hungry for oil. As the rest of the world is cut out of the Iraqi oil right now, the US traders were out of the Iraqi oil then. The political power brokers or the lobby groups always serve in the middle ground between businessmen of the world and the respective governments.
The US govt. cut out of Iraqi oil business in the last decade was gunning for some reason to get in and in the pre-text of WMD, they eventually got in. Now that the reason is not valid anymore the US government was looking for some other reason to throw at the world. So they dug this up and hence the report. However this wouldn't justify Iraqi Invasion. Who will dig the current spate of contracts being handed out by the US backed Iraqi government? There got to be another conqueror to do that! We all know that Winners write history. This is exactly what is happening in the saga of Paul Vocker report and Natwar Singh.
Even if Natwar singh or whoever is accused of in the report has done some deals, it is only as condemnable as the current political power (both Iraq and US). They are businessmen, lobbyists and politicians and they play their role according to the situation. In US terms they are power brokers and entrepreuners.
Why shoot the messenger or blame the bearer of bad tidings?
posted by aaraar at 8:34 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home