No transparency, no legitimacy: the backlash begins

A great op-ed in the Guardian by fellow blogger (and former colleague) Peter Chowla – he’s perhaps too modest to post if for himself, so I’ve done that for him below.  Also signs that the inevitable backlash against the winner’s legitimacy – given the lack of transparency of the process – has begun, with critical comments from Oxfam and Save the Children in this piece.

Here’s Peter’s op-ed Continue reading

Russia backs Kim

Yesterday Russia joined the US, Canada, Mexico, Korea, and Japan in saying they will back Kim.  They have only 1.7 per cent of the votes at the Bank, but they do have one of the 25 board seats. And they’re the first BRICS country to come out for him.  Perhaps tellingly, their statement didn’t explain why they preferred Kim to his more experienced challenger, Okonjo-Iweala.  I expect this is the route those backing Kim for (misguided) geopolitical considerations will go. Praise Kim, don’t mention the alternative, or how they decided his merits were better than Okonjo-Iweala’s. We shall see soon enough.

No merit based discussion took place

Sources tell me that despite the fact that the board met today for what was planned to be a discussion on the merits of the two remaining candidates, Jim Yong Kim and Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, no such discussion took place, with only the African directors speaking for Ngozi. Ocampo hit the bull’s eye when he said in his withdrawal statement “… as we approach the final phase of this process, it is clear that it is becoming no longer a competition on the merits of the candidates but a political exercise.”

So the Obama who told the American people 4 years ago “yes we can”, is now telling the rest of the world “no, you really cant”.  He may talk the talk, but he sure does not walk the walk.