By Richard Adams (THE GUARDIAN, 14/04/07):
When George Bush picked Paul Wolfowitz as head of the World Bank, the biggest fear was that the architect of the US invasion of Iraq would turn the world’s most important aid agency into a neocon arm of the White House. The reality has been far worse: in two years Wolfowitz has turned the bank into a rudderless, divided institution that is seeing its credibility drain away.The most obvious villains of this particular drama are Wolfowitz and his small coterie of advisors. But in reality the sound haunting the bank’s executive board and their government masters is that of chickens coming home to roost.
Back in 2005, when the Wolfowitz appointment was announced, there was a brief flutter of mutiny on the part of the European nations that hold a substantial number of the bank’s purse strings. Yet they eventually waved through the appointment with barely a flicker - being more concerned with protecting the cosy agreement that allows Europe to pick the head of the International Monetary Fund, while the US gets its choice in the World Bank.
This is a shabby arrangement - and the appointment of Wolfowitz would have been the ideal catalyst for the Europeans to end it. But they shied away from the fight and now are suffering the consequences: a lame duck president in the World Bank, appointed by a lame duck president in the White House.
In spite of its gleaming headquarters and heavyweight staff - boasting enough PhDs to stock several reputable economics departments - the bank is a fragile organisation. It is only as powerful as the rich developed governments that fund it allow it to be. That’s why the controversy that has engulfed Wolfowitz this week hurts the bank more than it does the hammer of Iraq.
Continuar leyendo.
When George Bush picked Paul Wolfowitz as head of the World Bank, the biggest fear was that the architect of the US invasion of Iraq would turn the world’s most important aid agency into a neocon arm of the White House. The reality has been far worse: in two years Wolfowitz has turned the bank into a rudderless, divided institution that is seeing its credibility drain away.The most obvious villains of this particular drama are Wolfowitz and his small coterie of advisors. But in reality the sound haunting the bank’s executive board and their government masters is that of chickens coming home to roost.
Back in 2005, when the Wolfowitz appointment was announced, there was a brief flutter of mutiny on the part of the European nations that hold a substantial number of the bank’s purse strings. Yet they eventually waved through the appointment with barely a flicker - being more concerned with protecting the cosy agreement that allows Europe to pick the head of the International Monetary Fund, while the US gets its choice in the World Bank.
This is a shabby arrangement - and the appointment of Wolfowitz would have been the ideal catalyst for the Europeans to end it. But they shied away from the fight and now are suffering the consequences: a lame duck president in the World Bank, appointed by a lame duck president in the White House.
In spite of its gleaming headquarters and heavyweight staff - boasting enough PhDs to stock several reputable economics departments - the bank is a fragile organisation. It is only as powerful as the rich developed governments that fund it allow it to be. That’s why the controversy that has engulfed Wolfowitz this week hurts the bank more than it does the hammer of Iraq.
Continuar leyendo.
No hay comentarios.:
Publicar un comentario