« I am, officialy, mad. [edited for coherence] | Wolfowitz »
March 17, 2005
On Wolfowitz and World Bank
I remain somewhat ambivalent about this - in this area I actually don't dislike Wolfowitz (it's his dumbass "transformative action via military force" thinking) - but the criticism about process here gets back to my issue with the Bush Administration and its sheer gratitious clutziness.
Shareholders' dismay at lack of consultation
By Alan Beattie in London and Edward Alden in Washington
Published: March 16 2005 20:49 | Last updated: March 16 2005 20:49
Surprise, and in some quarters dismay, was a common response in the World Bank's other large shareholder countries to Paul Wolfowitz's nomination.
The lack of consultation before the announcement meant that European governments - who collectively hold about 30 per cent of the votes on the bank's executive board to the US's 17 per cent - were slow to react. "There are going to be a lot of very unhappy people, but they may be as upset about the process as about the person," said one European official. "They were supposed to consult us and there was no consultation."
.....
Privately, European officials in Washington and bank staff have expressed concern that the US would put forward such a controversial candidate for the post. One concern is that his appointment would make it more difficult for the World Bank to operate effectively in the Middle East.
Many development campaigners were in no doubt. "We consider the choice of Wolfowitz utterly inappropriate to lead such a key institution," said Jeff Powell, co-ordinator of the Bretton Woods Project, a watchdog non-governmental organisation. "This appointment will only serve to confirm suspicions that the World Bank is a tool of US foreign policy."
.....
"But I fear they will grudgingly accept the nomination," she said. "There is a feeling that we have to get on with America."
One common concern was whether the White House was trying to turn the World Bank into an agency of the "war on terror", assuming a mission of democratisation and adopting political criteria for lending. If so, it may find itself with an uphill task.
.....
Fair points overall, ex Powell's although there is a valid issue on Wolfowitz and confusion in re US FP and WB policy. Does muddy waters.
I would suggest that ultimately I wouldn't be anti-Wolfowitz, but there was a right way to do this (drum up support) and wrong way (stick in the eye).
I am at a loss as to why the Bush Administration is always on the wrong way. It increases long term and even medium term transaction costs.
Posted by The Lounsbury at March 17, 2005 05:55 PM
Filed Under:
Jan-July 2005
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.aqoul.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/801

RSS



