The decision of just who will replace Paul Wolfowitz as head of the World Bank is the question of the day. Wolfowitz, accused of arranging the extraordinary promotion and salary package for his girlfriend, also a World Bank employee, was forced to announce his resignation on May 17. The United States, backed by the Europeans, wants to continue the 60 year tradition (I say tradition, as it is not written in law) of appointing the successor. The G-20, currently headed by South Africa, have taken a different approach, insisting that the replacement be named in an "open, transparent process with candidates not restricted by nationality". This movement seems to have picked up steam as both Brazil and Australia have joined the call for a candidate not personally picked by Washington.
The candidates currently being circulating in Washington include Bill Frist (SEC, anyone), Robert Zoellick (US Trade Representative, negotiator of CAFTA) and current Deputy Treasury Secretary Robert Zimmitt. More of the same, as if I expected anything else from this crowd in Washington.
After 60 years, I feel that it is time for the United States and Europe to give up their royal decision making in naming the head of both the World Bank and the IMF, respectively. It's ironic that the nations most impacted by the decisions of these international organizations have never had the opportunity to be involved in the decision making process in who leads them.
No comments:
Post a Comment