The conservative Washington Times Newspaper manages to be tough on both the World Bank and Jim Kim, while endorsing Ngozi, all at the same time. It puts its argument this way;  “The World Bank will be interviewing candidates for its next president in a process meant to be open, transparent and merit-based. President Obama’s nominee, Jim Yong Kim, president of Dartmouth College, has the inside track, though developing-country aspirants, such as Nigeria’s Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, are better qualified. There are also many Americans who would make a better choice.” Adding “In an ideal world, there would be no World Bank. When selecting the institution’s next leader, America – and the world – have a lot more talent to offer than Dr. Kim.”

Here is a question that keeps on nagging at me; what will be the reputational cost to the World Bank and Mr. Kim himself, once the charade of this selection process is over and he is confirmed as the new President of the World Bank?.

I say once, since it seems quite clear that after all the noise about merit based selection by the G20, the directors on the board of the bank will eventually cast their votes according to their shares.

Now, that there seems to be almost a universal judgment that Mr. Kim is the least qualified of the three candidates for the job, how will his credibility – and hence effectiveness, and that of the bank, fare after he takes over?