Farm and Food File
for the week beginning
Sunday, April 16, 2006
Alan Guebert
USDA: Defenders of the corrupt
Documents made public in Australia’s inquiry of the $215 million
in kickbacks paid to the Saddam Hussein regime show American-based Australian
diplomats working hand-in glove-with U.S. Dept. of Agriculture and the State
Dept. officials to quash American concerns about Australia’s lock on Iraqi
wheat imports before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
According to declassified Australian cables between Canberra,
Washington and Baghdad from June to November 2003, Australian diplomats pressed
“senior USDA officials and other appropriate political and agricultural
figures” to pressure an export-directed U.S. farm group, U.S. Wheat Associates,
to stop its “the smears and innuendo” of Australia’s monopoly wheat exporter,
AWB, over what then appeared to be illegal payments to Iraqi officials.
In a June 7, 2003 cable
to Canberra, Australian Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Thawley noted he had “made
a demarche” to a high State Dept. official whose title and name were redacted
in the declassified memo to go “through the previous history of our dealing
with the US Wheat Associates.”
The official, reported Thawley, “said that he would pass on our
concern to the (redacted name) this evening. He said that he regarded such
allegations as absurd and could understand our reaction.”
But the allegations were not absurd.
Two years later an independent probe into the United Nations
Oil For Food Program clearly showed AWB, Australia’s single desk wheat
exporter, paid $215 million in bribes and kickbacks to Hussein and his cronies
between 1999 and 2003 to get Aussie wheat into Iraq.
Later, in the same cable, however, the State Department
official’s identity is unmasked. In a parenthetical aside, Thawley adds, “Since
drafting this, Larson has called to say one option [for the U.S. State Dept.]
would be to respond publicly to a question from an Australian journalist and
reject the claims.”
U.S. Wheat Associates explain that “Larson” is Allen Larson,
the former undersecretary for economic, business and agricultural affairs to
then-U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell.
Thawley ends by assuring Canberra “We will follow up with other
[redacted] officials with more direct responsibility for programs next week.”
And he did.
In a June 14, 2003 cable from Washington to every high-ranking
official back home--including Prime Minister John Howard and top trade official
Mark Vaile--the embassy noted it had spoken with USDA Undersecretary J.B. Penn
about the AWB-Iraq controversy.
Penn, the cable noted, “said it would be very unhelpful if
Flugge continued to comment on” U.S. Wheat’s allegations of AWB wrongdoing and
reports that newly conquered Iraq would not import American “genetically
modified” animal feed.
Flugge is Trevor Flugge, the former AWB chief who only weeks
before had been named co-leader (with U.S. grain executive Dan Amstutz) of the
American-led effort to revitalize Iraq’s farm and food sectors.
Penn also alerted the Aussies that he “would hold a media
conference with Amstutz on 16 June” to attempt to defuse angry American farm
response over Flugge’s appointment in Iraq and the power he would continue to
hold over U.S. food exports to Baghdad.
Other cables detail contacts Australian diplomats had to
influence the growing American anger over Iraqi imports of Australian wheat.
Two were with staff members of then-Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-SD,
and Kansas Republican Sen. Pat Roberts.
The gist, noted the cable, is “given that senior senators are
focusing carefully on the [Iraqi] contracts in question, we will at some point
have to be ready to explain specific aspects of the contracting process.”
That “point” came in late 2005. After the UN kickback report
was released, Australian Prime Minister John Howard appointed a commission to
investigate AWB. The Cole Inquiry, which began its hearings in Feb. 2006, laid
bare the scandal. Ironically, Prime Minister Howard testifies to the Inquiry
April 13.
The cables are extraordinary in two ways. First, they show the
lengths to which the Australian government went to protect the
soon-to-be-tarred AWB, its hand-picked monopoly wheat exporter.
Second, and even more extraordinary, is how Bush Administration
appointees took the word of Aussie officials over that of U.S. farmers. Who do
they work for anyway--you or Australia?
© 2006 ag comm