PO'd.

I've been pissed-off about the US's treatment of the UN for years.  First we corrupt it, then we accuse it of corruption. 

Until now, the main source of irritation has been the use of the "oil-for-food scandal" to beat up the UN -- and particularly Kofi Annan.  Few Americans have delved very deeply into that scandal, but if they did they'd find strong threads of American corruption woven into the story.  "Oil-for-food" was a Security Council mess and who, if not America, owns the Security Council.  Here's the latest from the Guardian's economics correspondent:

The US uses its aid budget to bribe those countries which have a vote in the United Nations security council, giving them 59 per cent more cash in years when they have a seat, according to research by economists. Kofi Annan, the outgoing UN Secretary-General, expressed his frustration at the power the US wields over the UN in his parting speech last week. In a detailed analysis of 50 years of data, Harvard University's Ilyana Kuziemko and Eric Werker provide the clearest evidence yet that money is used by the council's richest member to grease the wheels of diplomacy.

The non-permanent members are the recipients of these bribes.  China, France, Russia and the UK, along with the US, are the permanent members.

Ten of the 15 seats on the security council are filled for two years at a time, by rotation. Kuziemko and Werker found that, in years when they have a seat, countries get an average of more than £8m extra in foreign aid from the US.

The US uses aid as leverage when important votes are pending.  That may seem like healthy, pragmantic politics to some, but for an organization whose chief purposes are peace and justice, the behavior of American administrations is cynical and destructive.  Worse, we don't limit our abuse of power to our role within the Security Council.

David Woodward, of the New Economics Foundation, who is writing about the paper for a forthcoming edition of the Lancet, said the findings suggest the UN should be radically reformed. 'As long as one country wields such influence, there will always have a degree of control over what goes on, and they will be likely to abuse that.' 'The biggest obstacle, in both the IMF and the World Bank, as well as the UN, is that the countries that now have power can use that power to block reform - and they do.'

Stinks.  But at least we know now that, when we're talking about reforming the UN, we first have to do something about reforming the US.

More on "oil for food" can be found here, here, and here...