Amid reports that the Volker Panel’s audit of Suzanne Rich Folsom’s INT is likely to be a whitewash, the Government Accountability Project is doing its own audit. Continue reading
While it does require some grasp of British geography, a comment by David Woodward in the Guardian brilliantly highlights the absurdity of the leadership selection process and the governance structures of the Bank.
In London on Monday, Zoellick sidestepped questions on whether the US should retain the right to annoint the head of the Bank. The FT reports that when asked if he was likely to do a Wolfowitz by bringing in his own people to key positions in the Bank, he quipped: “I don’t have people. I have two cats and two rabbits.” Which does raise the question of whether they would be better qualified than some of the Wolfowitz appointees. Continue reading
In May, Washington-based thinktank the Center for Global Development launched an online survey about the selection process, criteria for rating candidates, and ratings for nine candidates chosen by their staff from names put forward in the international media. Over 700 responses were received and now the results are in. Continue reading
In this insightful Salon.com piece on Bush administration figures who’ve written in support of former Cheney advisor Lewis “Scooter” Libby (you have to go through their ‘click on sponsor’ page), Sydney Blumenthal offers this damning insight on the lengthiest of those letters of support, written by World Bank president Paul Wolfowitz: Continue reading
One of the best pieces yet on Zoellick’s time at CSIS and as US trade representative. Bizarrely, liberal economist Jagdish Bhagwati has accused Zoellick of pushing free trade at the expense of development: “He was using bilateral deals with Chile and Singapore to try to ram through restrictions on the use of capital controls,” Bhagwati says. “I can’t think of a single developmental economist who would say this is a good idea, and it suggests a cavalier interest in developing countries.”