The UnStories

Its vanished. Like a nonperson, a nonevent, an "un-story", search for it and you'll find few responses, and strangely fewer from US sources. Interesting, in that two American women are dead - that's twice as many as in most sensational murder stories.

So it seems the clampdown is in place, and there are no questions answered (nor, apparently, asked). Here's some coverage from Agence France Presse via Australia though.

Initial reports Saturday said the clash was sparked off by a quarrel over the conflict in Iraq, UN sources requesting anonymity said.

But the mystery deepened Sunday when UN authorities refused to give any information on what might have provoked the gunfight.

"We cannot offer conclusions on the reason for the shooting," Feller said. Police had no information of prior discussions between Jordanian and American officers, he said.

However, the same day's Sunday Times reports

An officer, a US citizen, described the incident in the Serbian province as a clash over the US role in Iraq.

Two Americans and a Jordanian were killed and 11 other officers wounded in the incident, which took place in the northern town of Kosovska Mitrovica.

"Everything started when the Middle Eastern guys told the American police officers that the US has occupied Iraq like every other country. The Americans were p***** off by these accusations," the UN policeman said.

UN police sources said four Jordanian police officers had been arrested in connection with the shooting.

Move on, please, move on, there's a good boy, nothing more to see here...

The UN may be delaying release of details pending notification of next of kin, but an organization of any efficiency whatsoever would certainly have achieved that by now. However, recent events indicate the UN's efficiency is in obscuring issues, not clarifying them. And the public affairs office at the world's premier international peace organization is becoming rather busy these days, as William Safire details in the NY Times:

Obstruction of justice has never had it so good. Last month, after some badgering in this space and elsewhere, the House International Relations Committee announced it would look into the $5 billion kickback scandal in the United Nations' six-year Iraqi oil-for-food program, the largest humanitarian aid effort ever undertaken.

Our State Department, eager for U.N. help in Iraq, wants no revelations of U.N. ineptitude and corruption. It waltzed the committee staff around.

Senate Foreign Relations, however, not wanting to be upstaged by its House counterpart, called instant publicity hearings to blow off steam. Chairman Dick Lugar asked if some countries turned a blind eye to the rampant theft of aid that should have gone to hungry Iraqis because they "saw a money-making opportunity."

Senator Joe Biden chimed in, demanding that our ambassador to the U.N., John Negroponte, release the names of the U.S. companies that State has known for years have been part of the kickback scheme. Negroponte, soon to be our man in Baghdad working with the U.N., said that no such list had been compiled.

Meanwhile, because U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan's son was on the payroll of the Swiss company hired to monitor the imports, and because Kofi's right-hand man had been in charge of the program rife with 10 percent kickbacks, the world's foremost diplomat announced he would appoint an independent panel to investigate.

He chose men of integrity: Paul Volcker, former U.S. Fed chairman; Judge Richard Goldstone, the first Balkans war crimes prosecutor; and Mark Pieth, a Swiss lawyer said to be an expert on money laundering.

End of cover-up, right? Wrong. Volcker properly required a Security Council resolution, which would presumably empower his panel to take sworn testimony and gain access to the U.N.'s corrupt contracts that enabled Saddam to build palaces instead of providing food to his people.

But such a U.N. resolution would reveal dealings with companies in Russia, France and China ? all Security Council permanent members whose nationals had their hands in the till. As Senator Lugar suggested, some nations had secret profiteering reasons to keep Saddam in power.

To nobody's surprise, Vladimir Putin's government was the first to say nothing doing. Russia's U.N. spokesman said, "We understand the reputation of the secretariat is in question, but we do not think it is possible to adopt a resolution on the basis of mass media reports."

Read the whole thing, of course. Google around a bit and learn all you can. (And Credit Roger L. Simon for shining as much a light on this issue as anyone these past few months.) But back on our topic of the Shootout at the Kosovo Corral, it's unlikely the UN will be able to spin this as paranoid right wing conspiracy, but time will tell.

But this is the organization that John Kerry will beg to return to Iraq.

MR. RUSSERT: If you were elected one year from now, will there be 100,000 American troops in Iraq?

SEN. KERRY: It depends on what the situation is you find on the ground on January 20th of 2005. I will tell you this, Tim. I will immediately reach out to other nations in a very different way from this administration. Within weeks of being inaugurated, I will return to the U.N. and I will literally, formally rejoin the community of nations and turn over a proud new chapter in America's relationship with the world, which will do a number of things. Number one, change how we're approaching North Korea. Number two, change how we're dealing with AIDS globally. Number three, change how we're doing with proliferation with Russia and other countries. Number four, change our approach to global warming and the effort of 160 nations. And that will take some of the poison out of the well that this administration has put there.

He'll return? We've never left the UN. But the U.N. did leave Iraq, rather abruptly. Of course, a careful read will reveal that while the question was about Iraq, the answer was not. It was, however, a rather loud and clear declaration of priorities, more insight into the early days of the reign of Kerry.

His "attack on Iraq" is a bell rung loudly, if still not altogether clearly, in his radio address to America (another unstory):

We can do that by creating an international mission authorized by the United Nations. That mission should become the main civilian partner in helping the Iraqi people hold elections, restore government services and rebuild their economy. This would make it possible to attract needed financial help from other nations, and show that Iraqi extremists are opposing not just the United States, but also the will of the nations of the world. Removing that "Made in America" label can send a message to Iraqi military and police that its time to do their jobs not because America is telling them to, but because the world stands ready to help them secure a stable Iraq.

"Removing that made in America label" - an odd choice of phrase for the self-proclaimed opponent of "Benedict Arnold" companies. Are we to assume that freedom and liberty are products he thinks America is unfit or incapable to export?

We are approaching the fifth anniversary of the arrival of the UN peacekeeping force in Kosovo, and the situation can certainly not be called "improving" - unless the push to make this past weekend's deaths an unstory succeeds.

Kerry's comments were timed for maximum effectiveness to coincide with Spain's announcement that they were abandoning Iraq. Now these inconvenient deaths render those comments ill-timed; it's to his benefit if the news is suppressed. Still it was Spain's pull out that reminded me why I'd had that feeling of deja-vu over this whole episode:

Asked about the nations that are already on the ground in Iraq after the ouster of Saddam Hussein 11 months ago, Kerry said, "Well, the fact is that those countries are really window dressing to the greatest degree".

John Kerry, after super Tuesday, quoted by Agence Fance Presse in Australian media again. Another quote AWOL from American sources. Italy, Spain, England, Australia, all... "window dressing"

Disappearing comments, disappearing stories, revealing the subtle, nuanced, dichotomy of John Kerry.

We'll await the revelations of the names of the deceased in Kosovo. We'll mark their passing as heroes. We'll await official word, but I expect these are two more fallen in the Global War on Terror.

For now they remain unstories. Shoved off the front page by media celebrations of the 700th American death in Iraq. Ignored in favor of horrific murders of college coeds, and pregnant women, and new books that detail that Bush planned on invading Iraq two months before the troops crossed the berm. Or was it that he didn't have a plan at all? I forget which story it is today...

Update: Details, including names, have been released. More here.