Wolfowitz woes

President Bush's appointment of neo-conservative Deputy Defence Secretary Paul Wolfowitz as his choice for World Bank president has provoked dismay around the world. According to Reuters:

Bush on Wednesday sought to head off objections to his choice by calling Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and other world leaders to explain why Wolfowitz would make a "strong" leader of the lending agency.

He described his choice as "a man of good experience" in managing a large organization like the Pentagon, and "a skilled diplomat" who is committed to global development.

News Google has hundreds of similar stories. Not surprisingly, overseas reaction has largely been unfavourable. Nor have other World Bank shareholders been thrilled, according to a story on Financial Times online:

Surprise, and in some quarters dismay, was a common response in the World Bank's other large shareholder countries to Paul Wolfowitz's nomination.  ..."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."

But process wasn't the only concern. Another was that this appointment would make it more difficult for the World Bank to operate effectively in the Middle East. Further:

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.

However a new Reuters story by Lesley Wroughton suggest members of the executive board were consulted - and made it clear they did not want Wolfowitz:

Sources close to the World Bank board said Wolfowitz's name was informally circulated several weeks ago among the 23-member board, which represents the bank's 184 member countries, and the reaction was made clear to Treasury Secretary John Snow.

"Mr. Snow knows that the reaction from the board was unfavorable," one source said. "Mr. Wolfowitz's nomination today tells us the U.S. couldn't care less what the rest of the world thinks."

But how have bloggers reacted? Kash at Angry Bear splutters:

Knowledge of economics be damned. Multilateralism be damned. We own those organizations, and it's time they know it.

Matthew Yglesias reserves his judgement:

It's a fitting gig for a disgraced former Pentagon official, though I suppose it'll lead to a diplomatic contretemps. I'm going to stake out a radically moderate view on this and say that I'd like to actually know something about Wolfowitz's views on what the World Bank does before offering judgment. Preventative wars are not, I take it, something the Bank head is able to launch.

William Butterfield at Corner Solution seems bemused:

Ahhhh... I am looking forward to being on the carrot end of the War on Terror. My colleagues... maybe notsomuch. Silviu?

Glenn Reynolds at InstaPundit wonders if:

It's almost as if they're trying to smoke people out.

Mark Thoma at Economist's View is cynical:

The qualifications are simple. There's only one. Tow the party line.

Brad DeLong wonders when the Bush clown show will end:

Can anyone come up with any reason to think that Paul Wolfowitz is the best person to be President of the World Bank?

And over at Daily Kos outrage is the name of the game:

So you help drag the nation into a bloody war with no exit strategy, cost the country $200 billion and counting, 1,500 American deaths and counting, tens of thousands of physical and mental injuries, and counting, and untold numbers of Iraqi dead.

All on false pretenses, with no real understanding of how our troops would be received.

How are you punished? ...Another "fuck you" from Bush to the world community. Mind boggling.

Personally I doubt Wolfowitz has the pragmatism and conciliatory approach necessary to overcome the suspicion of Europe and developing countries. As we have learned from Iraq, it is much easier to blow things up than to rebuild them. But I may be proved wrong. He's no dummy.

UPDATE: Also worth a look is today's Washington Post story explaining how the World Bank chooses a President (registration may be required).

UPDATE 2: The 20 March Sunday Telegraph (registration required) reports that Joseph Stiglitz, former chief economist at the World Bank, has launched a savage attack on US plans to appoint Paul Wolfowitz:

In an exclusive interview, the American Nobel laureate said: "The World Bank will once again become a hate figure. This could bring street protests and violence across the developing world." He described President Bush's determination to appoint his deputy defence secretary to the important post as "either an act of provocation or an act so insensitive as to look like provocation". Wolfowitz is widely regarded as the creator of the policy that led to the US war in Iraq.

...In an interview with Liam Halligan, the economics correspondent of Channel 4 news, Stiglitz said he was concerned that the Bank would "become an explicit instrument of US foreign policy". He added: "It will presumably take a lead role in Iraqi reconstruction, for instance. That would jeopardise its role as a multilateral development body."

This is Stiglitz's first public utterance since last week's nomination. ...Stiglitz said Wolfowitz was unsuitable in part because the US war in Iraq remains profoundly unpopular in many of the territories where the World Bank works. But he also complained that Wolfowitz has the wrong skills.

"He has no training or experience in economic development or financial markets," Stiglitz said. The Bank was the most important institution addressing poverty, he said. "We need someone in charge who knows. . . development."

UPDATE 3: Despite early opposition to his nomination, on 31 March 2005 the directors of the World Bank, representing 184 countries, unanimously approved Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz as the organisation's 10th president. According to the BBC report:

The US deputy defence secretary said he wanted his legacy to be "real success in reducing poverty especially in Africa, the continent which most desperately needs it".

"I am very prepared to listen and prepared to be an international civil servant," he said. Mr Wolfowitz, 61, who will take over at the World Bank from 1 June, denied that he would use his position to push broader US foreign policy objectives such as spreading democracy and free markets.

"The fact is that when it comes to poverty reduction, it is not a question of American foreign policy, or British foreign policy or South African foreign policy. It [poverty reduction] is a unifying goal and it is one that I believe in deeply."

News Google lists over 700 related news reports.

Comments

[Mark Thoma]

I should have said "toe" the party line...

Good blog.

Mark Thoma