Bush picks Wolfowitz for president of World Bank

Jamie S

Member
Actually, I am genuinely interested in what his economics are like. The general tone of the commentary has been about America vs the rest of the world, rather like the first post in this thread and I haven't read anything about what he'd actually do in the World Bank.

I'm off home now, but I expect a full analysis from Oliver by Monday morning.

Cheers
 

Pearsall

Prodigal Son
I don't really know enough about Wolfowitz to make any sort of judgment on his potential role in the World Bank. He certainly dropped the ball massively as one of the most prominent people to dismiss Gen. Shinseki's estimates for the number of troops needed for the occupation of Iraq - an enormous fuckup.

More reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Wolfowitz

Also, if you want to read a good debate on the efficacy of debt relief (with arguments both for and against), check out this post from Abiola Lapite:
http://foreigndispatches.typepad.com/dispatches/2005/03/what_tony_blair.html
 

turtles

in the sea
oliver craner said:
You didn't start this thread just to bait me did you Dave? (Do you mean bait or bate, incidentally?)
Hohoho, yes I did mean bait...and no, I was genuinely suprised and angered by bush's pick and wanted to discuss. but when i started this thread, i knew who would be the first one to dissent. ;)

Anwyay, as for the post you quoted, I agree with Rambler that the analysis of the UN and the World Bank's failings are pretty accurate, but the idea that Bolton or Wolfowitz are going to turn these organizations into idealistic outlets of international benevolence is kinda silly. Wolfowitz will use the World Bank to maintain America's dominant position in the world. period. If nocking over a few dictatorships happens to help the cause, then i'm sure that's what will happen. But if keeping some third world country poor and destitute so some US corporation can keep its profits up is what America needs, then that is what will happen.

I'm sorry but I don't buy Wolfowitz's supposed altruistic reasons for war on Iraq. He's an imperialist through and through.
 

luka

Well-known member
i was going to mention the chavez-pinochet thing but it's not worth it with oliver, he just says these things for effect.
 

jenks

thread death
good profile of the wolf in today's ft - they chose to highlight his close relations with suharto - didn't do much to make me feel better about the appointment but i hope i'm wrong
 

craner

Beast of Burden
By the way, it wasn't as if the Pinochet-Chavev conflation was that easy...read the words 'money-washer'.... what was aid money used for in either case (a specific question)...
 

luka

Well-known member
Wolfowitz acceptable as World Bank head, say Germans

22.03.05 1.00pm


BERLIN - German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said on Monday that the United States nominee to head the World Bank, Paul Wolfowitz, could yield positive surprises and Germany would not block his selection.

Schroeder said he thought Germany could work constructively with Wolfowitz, the US deputy defence secretary, and approved of the tradition that the United States names a candidate for World Bank president.

"The US president phoned me up to say what he intended and I told him Germany would not stand in his way," Schroeder told Germany's n-tv television. "I have the impression we could be positively surprised."

Many European governments have reacted with private unease to Washington's choice of Wolfowitz, best known as the architect of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, at a time when they are trying to mend relations with the United States.

Germany was a vocal opponent of the Iraq war, and the issue put a strain on ties that the two countries have struggled to repair.

Schroeder is the first leader of a major European nation to take such a positive view of Wolfowitz's nomination.

French President Jacques Chirac "took note" of the choice, his spokesman said last week, while British Prime Minister Tony Blair has remained silent.

"I don't think the Europeans could really have insisted on another candidate," said Henning Riecke, transatlantic relations expert at the German Council on Foreign Affairs.

"We mustn't forget Wolfowitz is an experienced diplomat who has experience of different ministries and who has worked intensively in development," he added.

"On the strength of his profile he is entirely suitable for the post, so perhaps Germany said let us accept someone who is competent even if on several points he has pursued policies which Germany did not agree with."

Last week German Development Minister Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul said of Wolfowitz's nomination: "The enthusiasm in 'old' Europe is not exactly overwhelming".

President George W Bush's controversial choice of Wolfowitz to head the World Bank will be discussed at the European Union summit on Tuesday.

The European Commission said on Monday that Wolfowitz had accepted an invitation to meet EU Development Commissioner Louis Michel and explain his views on development and poverty reduction, the bank's key missions.

Wolfowitz's approval by the bank's board -- which operates by consensus -- is widely seen as a foregone conclusion.

- REUTERS
 
O

Omaar

Guest
Monbiot on Wolfowitz's appointment

"Martin Jacques argued convincingly in the Guardian last week that the US neocons are "reordering the world system to take account of their newly defined power and interests."(18) Wolfowitz's appointment is, he suggested, one of the "means of breaking the old order". But what this surely illustrates is the unacknowledged paradox in neocon thinking. They want to drag down the old, multilateral order and replace it with a new, American one. What they consistently fail to understand is that the "multilateral" system is in fact a projection of US unilateralism, cleverly packaged to grant the other nations just enough slack to prevent them from fighting it. "
 

craner

Beast of Burden
Yes, but Monbiot's idea is that we all go and live in eco-communes: build homes out of timber and straw bales, wattle, daub and thatch, or live in yurts or zomes, home-make cider, bread, and goat's cheese, and get go-karts to run on vegetable oil. Sounds quite nice...in Somerset, during a hot English summer. His other idea is a Utopian, and frankly vacuous, "multinational system of global governance" based on the economics of Maynard Keynes. He suggests that the IMF, World Bank and UN be dismantled on the basis of these half-baked proposals, which is some vanity.
 

luka

Well-known member
what do you mean 'yes but'? yes, this is a very good, well researched article presenting unanswerable arguments in a articulate level headed way, but i'm going to indulge in some snide irrelevant point scoring anyway? what's all that about? just admit it. I am oliver craner and i am in league with the devil. come out the satanic closet, you'll feel better about yourself. i am working for satan, go on say it!
 

rewch

Well-known member
as satan is not an entity that can be summoned to appear in court, how can he be libelled?
 

Paul Hotflush

techno head
luka said:
what do you mean 'yes but'? yes, this is a very good, well researched article presenting unanswerable arguments in a articulate level headed way, but i'm going to indulge in some snide irrelevant point scoring anyway? what's all that about? just admit it. I am oliver craner and i am in league with the devil. come out the satanic closet, you'll feel better about yourself. i am working for satan, go on say it!

Come on, Monbiot is a complete fruitcake.

In response to the rest of the thread, even if Wolfie is a US hegemony-perpetuator (a position I don't agree with), what's the problem? I'd much rather have that than a Chinese one...
 

matt b

Indexing all opinion
In response to the rest of the thread, even if Wolfie is a US hegemony-perpetuator (a position I don't agree with), what's the problem? I'd much rather have that than a Chinese one...

he openly endorses pax americana, so he clearly supports US world dominance. why is this is a problem? have you seen what america has been doing to other countries recently? it's not an issue of either/ or so your last sentence is stupid.
 

Paul Hotflush

techno head
OK, give me a realistic alternative.

Obviously it's not a question of either/or, but for the purposes of a forum... :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

matt b

Indexing all opinion
Paul Hotflush said:
OK, give me a realistic alternative.

each country concerns itself with dealing with issues inside its own national boundaries and co-operates with other countries in a consistent way that follows international law (rather than wanting to dominate/control them), would be a start.
 

Paul Hotflush

techno head
I find when attempting to analyse foreign affairs, there is generally a barrier that people have differing degrees of difficulty passing. It's got two parts to it really: the first being that foreign affairs, much like domestic politics in democracies, are defined by various interest groups (in this case nations) attempting to increase their power at the expense of others. The second part is, for the European liberal, one of realpolitik: the acceptance that the current situation (American dominance) is infinitely preferable to any realistic alternative (the most likely current one being American dominance being replaced by Chinese economic and political dominance). Once you accept that, and try to get over any inherent xenophobia towards Americans in general, you'll have much better chance of making a balanced judgement of events around the world.

It pretty much boils down to this: no-one's saying the Americans are a picture of virtue, but bloody hell, what about everyone else?! There's nothing lazier than slagging off the yanks.
 
Top