Wolfowitz? For the Bank? Seriously??

[all_i_want]

Oh for goodness sake ~ take off your rose coloured glasses and look at the world for what it is and always has been a harsh place where shit happens and people die. Iraq was fucked up big time 5 years ago and there was no prospect of respite from the dictator, Islamic fanatics were openly preaching violence against the great satan and laying their plans. There was no peace, prosperity or world respect 5 years ago and there never has been.

lets not turn this into an iraq debate again

 

[A_Wanderer]

No, it isn't about Iraq it is about people seeing history according to their own politics ~ the fact is that the world was fucked up when Clinton was president, to suggest that it is mainly or exclusively the fault of this administration is disengenous at best.

 

[Sherry Darling]

A-Wanderer, I agree that the good old days weren't always good. But I don't think you can deny that the US five years ago had more respect globally.

Ft. Worth--there have been several calls for you to back up your rhetoric with some facts. I have to say, I always dislike the tone of someone who implies, "Those who are reasonable can see that I'm right."

Where are these facts you refer to? What development experience does Wolfowitz have? What has he accomplished that leads you to believe he's the best man for the job, esp. with folks out there like Jeffery Sachs, or Paul Krugman (ok, he's done mostly domestic stuff) or Amayarta Sen, Ha-Joon Chang, or Joseph Stigletz? When you have time, I'd be interested in your facts.....

Peace,
Cheryl

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

from Wonkette..

Those "very enthusiastic, detailed and lengthy [phone] conversations" that Paul Wolfowitz had with Bono last week? Already paying dividends!

Other topics Wolfie and Bono discussed:

Wolfowitz: "You know, Pop was OK, but I just don't think you really captured the true joyous nature of techno."

And: how, in the late '80s, Bono and his mates blew their chance at a Pax U2iana. Springsteen was over. Stipe was going bald. Gangsta rap was just a minor uprising in a faraway land. But instead of exercising its full power, U2 went multicultural on Rattle and Hum and lost its competitive advantage. Ever since, it's been the France of rock... — GREG BEATO

 

[Scarletwine]

A-Wanderer, I agree that the good old days weren't always good. But I don't think you can deny that the US five years ago had more respect globally.

Ft. Worth--there have been several calls for you to back up your rhetoric with some facts. I have to say, I always dislike the tone of someone who implies, "Those who are reasonable can see that I'm right."

Where are these facts you refer to? What development experience does Wolfowitz have? What has he accomplished that leads you to believe he's the best man for the job, esp. with folks out there like Jeffery Sachs, or Paul Krugman (ok, he's done mostly domestic stuff) or Amayarta Sen, Ha-Joon Chang, or Joseph Stigletz? When you have time, I'd be interested in your facts.....

Peace,
Cheryl

It's only been 3 months since the admin began and every move is worse than the last.

Unfortunately I can only imagine the world Sach could create.
I wish I could retreat back into detachement, ignorance, and the family tunnel vision I had for a few years.

 

[Irvine511]

I never said he was my top choice for the World Bank and I am not waving banners in his support. However, he is a very experienced person and Bush could have picked a much less qualified person.

ah, the poetry of lowered expectations ... like our toleration of a president who can't string together a coherent answer to a question and demonstrates a lack of grasping even the most fundamental points of his policies (see the january 2004 "meet the press" interview, the first debate).

yes, it could be worse ... somehow ...

 

[cmb737]

Ft. Worth--there have been several calls for you to back up your rhetoric with some facts. I have to say, I always dislike the tone of someone who implies, "Those who are reasonable can see that I'm right."

I second this and too would like to hear a better explanation than "he's run big organizations, the world bank is a big organization"...and nothing quoted from Brit Hume

 

[all_i_want]

curious as to why there has been so little response to this thread from anyone who supports wolfowitz's nomination

 

[verte76]

curious as to why there has been so little response to this thread from anyone who supports wolfowitz's nomination

I was thinking the same thing. Doesn't anyone like this guy? I'd really like to know. I know there are Wolfowitz fans here!

 

[najeena]

No, the world has never been perfect, and I never said it was. Watching as Bush makes one irresponsible decision after another- it hurts. It hurts us as individuals, and it hurts us as a country.

 

[Anu]

I found the following on "Daily Kos". The title of the blog is followed by a poll that Bono is winning handily. love, Anu

World Bank- Bono vs Wolfowitz (snark, with poll)
by JLongs
Thu Mar 17th, 2005 at 05:08:48 PST

This is a joke, right?
Someone please tell me there's a real, genuine financial wizard somewhere in the nominating pipeline to run the world bank.

(continued below)

Diaries :: JLongs's diary ::

So, let's compare.

Experience in Running a Bank

Bono-No
Wolfowitz-No

Bono DOES have experience running a rock group that probably collects more money than most banks. Wolfie has experience running the Pentagon, the black hole into which the American taxpayers throw money.

(I'm shortening it to Wolfie just because I don't want to be here typing out his name all daggone day.)

Degree in Finance or Similar Field
Bono-No
Wolfie-No

Bono writes some good songs, though, and imagine the television ads. Wow! They'd make those i-pod commericals look sick. Wolfie knows how to blow stuff up.

Compassion
Bono-Yes
Wolfie-No

Bono's got a good record of helping the downtrodden and impoverished. Wolfie has a long record of grossing us out. The comb-licking episode is permanently scarred into my brain. He's not on record as showing any sort of compassionate behavior.

Connections
Bono-Yes
Wolfie-Yes

Everyone knows who Bono is and a lot of folks like him. Wolfie has Dubya, and like Lola in the song, what Dubya wants, Dubya gets.

Maybe it's part of a new deficit reduction scheme. Plunder the world bank! Yee haw!

(I loved The Daily Show's sendup of the whole "they're both big" thing. Made me laugh until I realized he was serious, then I cried.)

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

Watching as Bush makes one irresponsible decision after another- it hurts. It hurts us as individuals, and it hurts us as a country.

Agreed.

Angela

 

[Ft. Worth Frog]

Sorry, I have been out for awhile. I hope nobody thought I was trying to convince them that Wolfie was the best for the position and that my ideas were the correct ones. To tell you the truth, I am not sure. I am not extremely familiar with the World Bank or with Wolfie's career.

However, it appears to me (emphasis on "appears". We all know what opinions are like ) that the response to his nomination is a kneejerk reaction. Contrary to popular opinion it does not appear that he is a "unilateralist". Much of his career has been spent working with Muslims (ambassador to Indonesia) and is very familiar with Asian countries from his stint as Assistant Sec. of State for E.Asia/Pacific Affairs. His philosophy re: Islam is not that it is a dangerous religion, but one that the West is guilty of misunderstanding for centuries. Much of his career has been in academic settings teaching foreign affairs (PHD in Poli Sci), holding a few chairs in that field, and even being on the advisory board for the Journal of Foreign Affairs(working on an academic journal requires one to be diplomatic, that's for sure). Also, IIRC, he was very involved in the transformation of the Phillipines and Korea into democracies. Whether or not this is grounds for nomination to the WB is debatable of course, but insights on his career should not be limited to his role in the Iraq War.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

www.newamericancentury.org

That site is so different now. You should have seen it before Iraq....

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

by Jim VandeHei, Washington Post Staff Writer

Vice President Cheney said yesterday that the elevation of White House loyalists and supporters of the Iraq war to key diplomatic posts puts the United States in a stronger position to force changes at the United Nations and improve the U.S. image abroad.


In an interview aboard Air Force Two, Cheney said the nomination of John R. Bolton to serve as ambassador to the United Nations in particular shows President Bush's commitment to ending corruption and changing the culture at the world body.

"There is clearly a lot that needs to be done at the United Nations," he said pointing to the oil-for-food scandal and recent charges of sexual assault by a U.N. official. "There is ample evidence here at home a great many Americans are not happy with the performance of the United Nations," Cheney said.

"We are the host country, we're the biggest contributor to its budget, and success long-term, I think, depends on the continued support of the U.S. and the American people," he continued. Cheney said the fact that Bolton has been a critic of the United Nations will give him "a great deal more credibility" tackling the challenges there.

In the interview conducted en route from Reno, Nev., the vice president bluntly acknowledged the administration's shortcomings in overcoming international hostility to American foreign policy and communicating a positive image of the United States abroad, especially to the Arab and Muslim world.

"If we are going to be successful long-term in the war on terror and in the broader objective of promoting freedom and democracy in that part of the world, we have to get the public diplomacy piece of it right," Cheney said. "Up until now, that has been a very weak part of our arsenal."

Cheney, who has been a driving force in the administration's foreign policy and privately advocated for Bolton to get the U.N. job and for longtime ally Paul D. Wolfowitz to head the World Bank, said top-level changes at the State Department should help set a better course.

"What the president has done . . . is make some personnel changes that he felt would strengthen our capacity as an administration to achieve our objectives," Cheney said.

The vice president said the decision to put three of the most influential women from Bush's first-term White House -- Condoleezza Rice , Karen P. Hughes and Dina Powell -- at the State Department signifies a new approach for Foggy Bottom. Privately, White House aides said the department is now a power center and one of the few agencies with a significant second-term role, especially dealing with Bush's inaugural pledge to spread democracy.

"Having Karen Hughes over there with Dina Powell and Condi gives us the best possible combination of people [to] actively and aggressively address those issues," Cheney said.

Conservative Fred Barnes, in an article on yesterday's Wall Street Journal editorial page, said the moves are part of "Mr. Bush's shake-up-the-world view." Bolton, Hughes and Powell still must be confirmed by the Senate, and Wolfowitz needs the approval of the World Bank; all are expected to overcome any opposition.

The rise of close White House allies is not over and may include Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby replacing Wolfowitz as deputy defense secretary, according to White House officials. When asked about the possible change, all Cheney would say is: "I need Scooter."

Cheney, who sometimes clashed with then-Secretary of State Colin L. Powell over the Iraq war, said he would not discuss whether the new team is working better than the first-term one because he did not want to offend anyone.

Critics charge the White House is purging its voices of dissent and sending the wrong signal to the world with Bolton and Wolfowitz, two controversial architects of the Bush foreign policy.

"I can't think of anybody more qualified than Paul Wolfowitz to run the World Bank," Cheney said.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

"I can't think of anybody more qualified than Paul Wolfowitz to run the World Bank," Cheney said.

Ummm, I don't think you tried very hard there Dick.

 

[verte76]

[B
"I can't think of anybody more qualified than Paul Wolfowitz to run the World Bank," Cheney said. [/B]

If so, that's a sad state of affairs for Washington to be in. This cannot possibly be true. I'm getting really tired of incompetence and mediocrity in Washington.

 

[drhark]

I have to claim ignorance on exactly what the World Bank is and does. I imagine there are others who posted knee jerk reactions to Wolfowitz on this thread who also don't have a clue as to what the World Bank is.

Anyone care to enlighten me? Is it a network of banks from different countries who lend to governments?
Is it's main priority to end poverty?
Why does the US have control over choosing the head?
Wouldn't the CEO of a major bank be the most qualified?
Could a CEO be bothered with this job?
Would appointment of a bank CEO elicit cries of corporate sellout?
Would a Harvard professor or a rock singer/activist be any more qualified than Wolfowitz?

 

[all_i_want]

I have to claim ignorance on exactly what the World Bank is and does. I imagine there are others who posted knee jerk reactions to Wolfowitz on this thread who also don't have a clue as to what the World Bank is.

Anyone care to enlighten me? Is it a network of banks from different countries who lend to governments?
Is it's main priority to end poverty?
Why does the US have control over choosing the head?
Wouldn't the CEO of a major bank be the most qualified?
Could a CEO be bothered with this job?
Would appointment of a bank CEO elicit cries of corporate sellout?
Would a Harvard professor or a rock singer/activist be any more qualified than Wolfowitz?

he World Bank is not a “bank” in the common sense. It is one of the United Nations’ specialized agencies, and is made up of 184 member countries. These countries are jointly responsible for how the institution is financed and how its money is spent. Along with the rest of the development community, the World Bank centers its efforts on the reaching the Millennium Development Goals, agreed to by UN members in 2000 and aimed at sustainable poverty reduction.

The "World Bank" is the name that has come to be used for the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International Development Association (IDA). Together these organizations provide low-interest loans, interest-free credit, and grants to developing countries.

Some 10,000 development professionals from nearly every country in the world work in the World Bank's Washington DC headquarters or in its 109 country offices.


The World Bank is run like a cooperative, with its member countries as shareholders. The number of shares a country has is based roughly on the size of its economy. The United States is the largest single shareholder, with 16.41 percent of votes, followed by Japan (7.87 percent), Germany (4.49 percent), the United Kingdom (4.31 percent), and France (4.31 percent). The rest of the shares are divided among the other member countries.

The Bank's president is, by tradition, a national of the largest shareholder, the United States. Elected for a five-year renewable term, the president of the World Bank chairs meetings of the Board of Directors and is responsible for overall management of the Bank.



Here is Wolfensohn's background:

Before joining the Bank, Mr. Wolfensohn was President and Chief Executive Officer of James D. Wolfensohn Inc, an investment firm that advised major international and U.S. corporations. He relinquished his interests in the firm upon joining the Bank.

Mr. Wolfensohn served as Executive Partner of Salomon Brothers in New York and head of its investment-banking department, Executive Deputy Chairman and Managing Director of Schroeder’s Ltd in London, President of J. Henry Schroeder’s Banking Corporation in New York, and Managing Director, Darling & Co of Australia.

Mr. Wolfensohn has participated in a wide range of cultural and volunteer activities throughout his life, especially the performing arts. In 1970, he became involved in New York's Carnegie Hall, first as a board member and later, from 1980 to 1991, as Chairman of the Board. During this time, he led its successful effort to restore the landmark New York building. He is now Chairman Emeritus of Carnegie Hall. In 1990, Mr. Wolfensohn also became Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington. On January 1, 1996, he was elected Chairman Emeritus.

Mr. Wolfensohn has been President of the International Federation of Multiple Sclerosis Societies and Director of the Business Council for Sustainable Development. He also served both as Chairman of the Finance Committee and Director of the Rockefeller Foundation and of the Population Council, and as a member of the Board of Rockefeller University.

In addition to serving as President of the World Bank Group, he is Chairman of the Board of the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton. Mr. Wolfensohn is also an Honorary Trustee of the Brookings Institution and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Century Association in New York.

Born in Australia on December 1, 1933, Mr. Wolfensohn is a naturalized United States citizen. He holds a BA and LLB from the University of Sydney and an MBA from the Harvard Graduate School of Business.

Prior to attending Harvard, Mr. Wolfensohn was a lawyer in the Australian law firm of Allen Allen & Hemsley. He served as an officer in the Royal Australian Air Force, and was a member of the 1956 Australian Olympic Fencing Team.

Mr. Wolfensohn is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a Fellow of the American Philosophical Society. He has been the recipient of many awards for his volunteer work, including the first David Rockefeller Prize of the Museum of Modern Art in New York for his work for culture and the arts.

In May 1995, he was awarded an Honorary Knighthood by Queen Elizabeth II for his contribution to the arts. The governments of Australia, France, Germany, Morocco, Norway, and Russia have also decorated him.


I hope those answered your questions.
The organization is explained above so I wont go into detail. It is main priority is to support development. US is the largest shareholder so they get to choose the head. Wolfensohn was CEO of an investment bank, so yes, they are qualified, and they can be bothered. A bank CEO would not elicit cries of corporate sellout. A Harvard professor with a development background or a CEO with a development background would be suitable.

The argument for Bono is that even he would do a better job than Wolfowitz.

 

[drhark]

Thanks for the info

 

[all_i_want]

Thanks for the info

so, free from the shackles of ignorance, what do you think about the wolfowitz nomination now?


also, one interesting point is that 'wolfensohn' means son of a wolf, and so does 'wolfowitz'. could this be the only reason bush nominated him ?

 

[deep]

also, one interesting point is that 'wolfensohn' means son of a wolf, and so does 'wolfowitz'. could this be the only reason bush nominated him ?

He probably thought no one would notice.

 

[drhark]

so, free from the shackles of ignorance, what do you think about the wolfowitz nomination now?


also, one interesting point is that 'wolfensohn' means son of a wolf, and so does 'wolfowitz'. could this be the only reason bush nominated him ?

This is one issue I'm afraid I don't have an opinion on. I would only say that I didn't have a problem with Mr. Wolf. as deputy SOD so why is he being moved to a new post?

 

[s_tielemans]

Look, it's probably all a simple mistake. Bush confused the nomination for World War with that of World Bank. Should be corrected in a matter of ...err...months probably

 

[Sherry Darling]

During this discussion, I've been wondering why the US gets to pick the Bank head, and the EU gets to pick the head of the IMF. No wonder the Global Souths calls it nedcolonialism! I was glad to see this statement by Rev. Jesse Jackson (who I don't always agree with but he's spot on here....)

IF IT’S REALLY A “WORLD” BANK,
THEN LET’S LOOK SOUTH
Reverend Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.
March 23, 2005


The Bush Administration in general, and Paul Wolfowitz in particular, would have you believe that 1,500 Americans have died, perhaps 100,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed, and more than $200 billion has been spent on invading and occupying Iraq, in the name of “democracy”.

Funny then that Paul Wolfowitz is now being promoted in a secret, opaque, closely held process that freezes out most of the world. Of special note, the selection of the new World Bank head freezes out the 1 billion people who live on less than $1 per day, and the 3 billion who live on less than $2 per day. It freezes out the entire Southern hemisphere­Africa, Asia, South America. In fact, it freezes out everyone who is not a Bush loyalist in the U.S., or a nervous European elite.

It is as if fighting world poverty were a ping-pong game between the U.S. and Europe, a game in which the poorer nations are not even allowed to enter.

But why? Why should the world’s poorest people be excluded from the process of selecting one of the most important leaders who will affect their lives? Why are the nations most controlled by World Bank and International Monetary Fund policies not allowed to nominate, or even participate in any meaningful way, in the selection of new leadership?

Is Nelson Mandela less qualified to run the World Bank than Paul Wolfowitz? Or how about one of the Brazilians behind the Lula government’s innovative proposal to eliminate hunger by taxing international arms sales? Or, since we know that the most direct route to fighting world poverty is to empower and educate poor women, why not a woman from the South to lead the World Bank, say, Arundhati Roy of India, or Nobel Prize winner Wangari Maathai of Kenya, two women who actually know something about helping poor people?

These names are not even considered. Only Americans, and even then, only hard-core Bush loyalists, are in the loop. In an entirely secret process, despite his lack of development credentials, and despite the widespread rejection of the idea when the Wolfowitz name was first floated publicly, George W. Bush followed up on his divisive choice of John Bolton for the U.N. with the promotion of leading war hawk Paul Wolfowitz to head the World Bank.

Forget all that talk about reconciliation with Europe and the rest of the world. Bush’s picks were like a thumb in each of the world’s wide-open eyes.

Since Bush makes up his own rules as he goes along, so should we. After all, when George W. Bush meets with Tony Blair, that’s a minority meeting­the U.S. & the U.K. together are only one-sixteenth of the world!

It’s time for a new set of international rules. The IMF is not just the property of Europe; and the World Bank can no longer be just a tool of U.S. foreign policy.

“One-dollar, one-vote” is no recipe for democracy.

The South deserves a voice, and a candidate. The South should nominate one of their own this week, even if just to break the stranglehold the U.S. & European elites have on the process, just to crack the ice a bit.

That nominee should have a program, a “4-D” platform:


* Democracy program, to open up the WB/IMF systems to the whole world;
* Development program, to move from big energy projects to micro-, women-centered projects, with an emphasis on renewable technologies;
* Disease-fighting program, to battle AIDs and malaria, and the other dread diseases which ravage the Southern hemisphere; and,
* Debt cancellation program, to completely eliminate the debts of Africa and Latin America, to bring the “Jubilee” described in the Bible to the world’s poorest people. 100% debt cancellation, with no conditions, no tricks, no limitations, no restrictions­the single most useful step we could take to fight world poverty.


We must challenge the process, right now, by acting as if the Southern nations matter. Nominate a Southerner. Practice democracy. Cancel the debt. Wipe the slate clean, and let’s start over.

Three billion poor people are waiting.

Reverend Jesse L. Jackson, Sr., is the Founder & President of the National Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, and a former candidate for President in 1984 & 1988.

 

[Se7en]

do other members of the bank have veto power over the US nomination?

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Wolfowitz Has No Agenda for U.S. Government-Wolfensohn

OTTAWA (Reuters) - Paul Wolfowitz, the U.S. nominee to head the World Bank, has given assurances he does not plan to further a U.S. government agenda, the outgoing president of the development bank said on Thursday.

"This process was I think less than transparent. But it is my hope that the person coming in will be true to what he has been saying to me for three days: That he has no agenda for the U.S. government, that he wants to be an international civil servant," James Wolfensohn told a House of Commons committee.

"And I believe what he is saying. I hope he will be another Bob McNamara, who came out of Vietnam and was probably the best president the bank has had," he said. Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara ran the bank from 1968 to 1981.

U.S. President George W. Bush's choice of Wolfowitz, one of the architects of the Iraq war, is a controversial one but it is unlikely to be opposed.

Traditionally, Washington names the head of the World Bank while Europe appoints the head of the International Monetary Fund, its sister organization.

 

[Norse]

The problem with Wolfowitz comes in two parts. Because he is largely under experienced for this job (No UN work, No recent diplomatic ventures) I really feel that when things get tough he is going to fall back on pushing forward the US agenda. Plus the bank is a huge and sprawling institution. While Wolfowitz does have some organizational skills, the bank needs a superhuman effort, charisma and a vision to keep it firing on all cylinders. And the worst thing that could happen to the bank is if he went in there guns a firing and because of a poor understanding of how the bank works and of lack of vision, he started to screw with something that while not the most efficient body in the world is an enormously important vehicle for good.

The next problem is just a PR problem. As far as I can tell the whole world is reeling after this decision. In a largely diplomatic job, I just don’t think Wolfowitz will have any creditability to get the job done.

 

[deep]

During this discussion, I've been wondering why the US gets to pick the Bank head, .

The Golden Rule.

 

[Sherry Darling]

I suspect you're right, Deep.

Power to the rich!