Wolfowitz tapped for World Bank

topic posted Wed, March 16, 2005 - 9:05 AM by  Unsubscribed
Share/Save/Bookmark
Advertisement
Wolfy at the World Bank...the Bank doesn't have an Army, so what is poor Wolfy to do?...channel money to "allies" in the "War on Terror"...??...


WASHINGTON (CNN) - President Bush said Wednesday that Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz is his choice to be president of the World Bank.

Wolfowitz was one of the main advocates for the war in Iraq.

President Bush outlined the reasons he chose Wolfowitz in a news conference Wednesday, calling him "a man of good experience."

"He helped manage a large organization," said Bush "He's a skilled diplomat. Worked at the State Department in high positions -- ambassador to Indonesia, where he did a very good job representing our country."

Wolfowitz's name was mentioned as a possible World Bank pick a few weeks ago, but the administration attempted to distance itself from that after reports of grumblings from the Europeans.

In addition to Wolfowitz's strong support for the Iraq war, Steve Radelet, a senior fellow at the Center for Global Development and a former undersecretary at the Treasury, said last week the Europeans were nervous that Wolfowitz would prove similar to former World Bank head and Former Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara.

Radelet said McNamara was accused of channeling aid to nations based not on need but on their support of U.S. policy.

Although not a formal code, traditionally the United States chooses the head of the World Bank while the Europeans pick the head of its sister organization, The International Monetary Fund. Both the U.S. and the Europeans have veto power over each other's choices.

Before coming to the Pentagon Wolfowitz taught international studies at The Johns Hopkins University.

From 1989 to 1993, Wolfowitz served as Under Secretary of Defense for Policy in the first Bush administration.

During the Reagan administration, Wolfowitz served for three years as U.S. ambassador to Indonesia, and before that he was an official at the State Department, according to a Defense Department Web site.

The World Bank, which gets its money from donor nations in the developed world, provides big loans to lesser-developed countries for modernization projects.

The bank has been criticized in the past for supporting grand schemes -- like airports or dams -- that failed to produce the intended economic boost and instead further burdened the borrowing country with debt and interest payments.

But the bank has tried to improved its image in recent years, both by exercising more discretion in the projects it supports and by forgiving some of the debt owed to it.
posted by:
Unsubscribed
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • The Wolfowitz in the Hen House

    Thu, March 17, 2005 - 5:42 AM
    Is anybody really surprised by this choice?

    If it shocks you then you still don't understand your opponent and as such cannot succeed against them.

    Blatant?

    Yes.

    Consistent?

    Yes.

    Dangerous?

    Obviously.

    But it is high time everybody began to take a larger and more critical view of these policies and understand them for their real character.

    This is the flip side of a domestic agenda that not only promotes empire but also the most actively Social Darwinist policy in decades. They are challenging the world to go forward, or descend into chaos and worse. Just complaining and being upset with these very limited choices we are being given is irrelevant. "Lead, follow, or get out of the way," is the mantra of the force arrayed against us.

    Let me put it another way.

    This is a very good example of Bush *spending* some of that *political capital* he was talking about. He is investing that capital in global financial institutions by making a hostile takeover of the *World Bank*.

    It is also high time everybody stopped believing their own propaganda about this guy being stupid. He is a figurehead and his group is anything but incompetent. This is more like the Reagan years than the Left should be complacent about. However they need to get over themselves and stop simply being reactionary.

    If you believe those myths you tend to underestimate your opponents and lose the real contests that matter. History demonstrates this is the reality.

    As long as they are always letting the Right take the lead they are going to be seen as *losers* in a global environment such as we see developing. Success is its own reward and these folks are *capitalizing* on that image making machine.

    You ask about what can Wolfowitz do as head of the world bank?

    Well one example is that he can eviscerate and strip the funding for programs to promote female literacy, choice, and economic development that have been contributing to real growth in the developing world but also to a lot of dissent and real empowerment for disenfranchised groups that are now challenging the global corporations to act more responsibly in respect to workers and the environment.

Recent topics in "US Foreign Policy"

Topic Author Replies Last Post
New Middle East Culture & Politics Tribe Steven 0 January 28, 2009
Message From Iraqi Resistance Unsubscribed 5 August 24, 2008
New tribe against the occupation of Afghanistan Unsubscribed 1 August 10, 2008
Obama, the prince of bait-and-switch: Afghanistan Unsubscribed 0 July 25, 2008