16 April 2007
Some of the recent comments and happenings related to the Paul Wolfowitz affair
The World Bank's Development Committee met today as part of the 2007 IMF/World Bank Spring Meetings. The official agenda included discussion of the Africa Action Plan and the Global Monitoring Report. The Committee made the following statement on recent events in its communique: "We have to ensure that the Bank can effectively carry out its mandate and maintain its credibility and reputation as well as the motivation of its staff. The current situation is of great concern to all of us. We endorse the Board's actions in looking into this matter and we asked it to complete its work. We expect the Bank to adhere to a high standard of internal governance." See the official agenda, background papers, and communique.
Protesters gathered outside the World Bank on Saturday afternoon to protest the institution's problematic investments in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, as well as World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz.
Wolfowitz commented that he intends to stay in his position at the Bank. "[The bank] has important work to do, and I will continue to do it," he remarked earlier today. See: Wolfowitz Says Won't Resign; Bank Says Concerned, by Karen DeYoung, Washington Post, April 15, 2007.
We've seen several messages about the content of the World Bank Press Reviews over the past days, which seem to overlook any negative or controversial coverage of the Wolfowitz affair.
We were also forwarded more comments posted by World Bank staff on an internal website. One catchy posting: "I hope the Board is taking note of the president's use of the Bank's external website to mount a non-too-subtle defense...Are he and Kevin going to post comments from Hilary Benn and others as well or just the governors who praise him?"
An Overlooked Angle in Wolfowitz Scandal?
Posted on www.worldbankpresident.org by Soren Ambrose, April 14, 2007
Isn't it odd that there are no questions being asked about a "secondment" arrangement in which international public funds are used to pay the exorbitant salary of a U.S. State Department staffer (and most recently director of a U.S. State Dept. front group) whose mission is to improve the U.S.'s image in the Muslim world?
I've seen nothing about a balancing of the secondment -- e.g., the State Dept. sends four of its staff to the Bank to balance out Shaha Riza's salary. And a five-year secondment must be rather unusually long.
But the key issue should be: why should international taxpayers be supporting efforts to popularize U.S. policy in the Middle East? Are we all really so cynical about the Bank's supposed status as a U.S. puppet that we don't even blink at such an arrangement?
The idea of a "non-political" World Bank was always a fantasy, but this seems to be pushing it a bit far.
Blogs
- www.worldbankpresident.org continues to provide frequent commentary on the most recent developments.
- And we'd like to welcome back the Village Voice's Bush Beat blog. Author Ward Harkavy first broke the Wolfowitz-Riza story back in September 2005.