Send As SMS

Monday, November 22, 2004

The Oil-For-Food Dollar amounts.

In a previous post, Kevin and I were listing numbers that were wildly different. I wasn't sure as to why we had numbers between 200 million and 23 billion. So, knowing Kevin and being uncertain as to my numbers, I did some checking to make sure I wasn't talking out of my you-know-what.

I found the following statement(pdf file) by Sen Carl Levin (D-MI) that had some numbers in it that probably is based on the current info the Senate has. Might the numbers change? It's possible based on further investigation. What else I learned is that Saddam got his money through different avenues. I always thought it was just the Oil-for-food program.

But Saddam repeatedly inflated the dollar amount of the humanitarian contracts and obtained kickbacks from these contracts and the oil sales to the tune of at least $1.7 billion.

Saddam’s abuse of the Oil-for-Food program, however, provided only a fraction – about one-sixth -- of Iraq’s total illicit income. According to the Duelfer Report, the vast majority – nearly three-quarters – of Saddam’s illicit income during the sanctions period was generated through publicly disclosed trade agreements, called “protocols,” to sell Iraqi oil to its neighbors: primarily Jordan, Syria, and Turkey.

It shows that the trade agreements, which were not part of the Oil-for-Food Program, were the largest single source -- 75% -- of Iraq’s illicit income, generating $8 billion out of a total that was estimated in the Duelfer Report to be $10.7 billion. According to the Duelfer Report, the Oil-for-Food program, which began in 1996, generated about $1.7 billion through kickbacks and surcharges to Saddam, or about 16% of Iraq’s total illicit income during the sanctions period.


Also, we evidently knew about the protocol program and did nothing about it.

So this was an interesting research project and gives me a better understanding of what we are debating.

4 Comments:

At 12:38 PM, Donald said...

What the hell are all them strange symbols???

 
At 3:05 PM, Kevin said...

The symbols are a common tactic with copyrighted material. Although that particular symbol is a new one to me. Usually it's an exclamation mark. The point being that it'd be a lot of work to manually go in and fix the text so that it looks like it was generated by whomever uses it. At least that's my assumption. I do know that I've seen the exclamation marks in newspaper articles from archives.

About a year ago I purchased an article from the Oregonian that was about my parents experiences surviving the Rwandan genocide in '96 or whenever it was. I was given explicit approval to use the article as long as it wasn't in a for-profit format. But, it was loaded with exclamation marks even so.

As for the $ figures... I thought my last comment downboard was specifying that the $200+ million was what Saddam was skimming off the top of the oil contracts. I'll have to go look again.

 
At 3:52 PM, Donald said...

Hey Kevin, That is what you said about the 200 million. I was researching all the different numbers I'd been hearing. Not really saying anyone was wrong...just trying to find specific breakdowns.

 
At 3:53 PM, Donald said...

That's odd about the symbols because it's from the Committee doing the Senate Hearing.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home