Opinions vary on whether Kofi Annan was taking pot shots at the United States and President George W. Bush in his address at the Truman Museum and Library in Independence, Mo., this week. Although a number of analysts said Annan, in a farewell address as secretary-general of the United Nations, was barbing America, he contends that was not his intention. “Nothing could be further from the truth,” he said.

The talk was so typical of the on-again, off-again administration of Annan in his 10 years as titular head of the U.N. He presided over a continuing deterioration of the United Nations as an effective world policy body, time and again backing away from needed and courageous stands on issues. Then in stepping down he chooses to bite the hand that has helped feed him so well for so long.

Annan says he was not criticizing the United States. Yet he focused on policies of the late Harry Truman as president and made it rather obvious he feels Bush and the United States have fallen short. He never named names but his intention was clear even though his own record of advancing the Truman ideals is questionable at best.

Here is a man from Ghana who benefited from study in America and who has been wined, dined and housed in high style in the United States for a long time. He somehow always turned up missing when it came to speaking out forcefully on issues such as terrorism, genocide and development of weapons of mass destruction, as in the case of Iran’s activity in the nuclear field.

The U.N. employees’ union once passed a resolution of no confidence in Annan’s management abilities and policies. Many believe he should have resigned after allowing the oil-for-food scandal that involved the villainous Saddam Hussein and an Annan son. Those are only a few of his failures. Yet when it comes time for him to step down, he finds it convenient to go after the United States whose financing and support have kept alive the organization Annan mismanaged.

The outgoing secretary-general offered five principles he considers essential to world order and tranquility: collective responsibility, global solidarity, rule of law, mutual accountability and multilateralism. That is a package he should have been promoting far harder and far sooner than in a farewell speech.

He was subtly preaching to many in the U.N. choir of anti-United States delegates and executives. The United States has made its errors in judgment, policy and action, but its decade-old record far outstrips this high-profile critic.

Annan’s flimsy response that he was not criticizing America was all too typical of his wishy-washy tenure as secretary-general.

The United Nations is a weaker and less effective group than it was 10 years ago when Annan began his tenure. Why no references in his farewell speech about what he failed to do rather than using the United States as a whipping boy?

The United Nations has been damaged by the poor guidance of Kofi Annan, popular as he might be right now with anti-American entities.