Posted on 05/10/2007 6:30:33 PM PDT by Kitten Festival
At some point even a sole superpower must recognise reality. Hopes for an effective presidency of the World Bank by Paul Wolfowitz are over. He must either go or be the lame-duck president of a deeply damaged institution.
The special panel established to investigate Mr Wolfowitz's behaviour towards the re-assignment of his girlfriend has concluded that he violated rules governing conflict of interest. Mr Wolfowitz's lawyer demands sufficient time to prepare a rebuttal. This request should be granted to remove suggestions of a lack of due process. But if this concession is granted, the administration must accept the legitimacy of the outcome of that process.
What is to be avoided, if at all possible, is an open split within the board. Yet that is what is now threatened. Assume that the panel confirms its finding. Assume, too, that Mr Wolfowitz does not resign. The board would then have to vote. Not to do so would devastate its authority. If the Europeans were to win, President George W. Bush would be humiliated. Yet even if the US were to win, it would be a victory without substance: Mr Wolfowtiz would be a lame duck. Either way, the bank and the US national interest would be severely harmed.
Some of the Americans who want such a showdown see what is happening as a malevolent European plot to bring down their courageous warrior against corruption. But the notion that the US alone cares about corruption in development assistance is outrageous, as anybody with knowledge of the history of US aid would understand. Theirs is a fight without a cause.
(Excerpt) Read more at ft.com ...
It looks like the FT has no problem throwing a man overboard just because he’s been unfairly slimed. People of principle should be revolted that we should always reward the slimers by giving them what they want. Enough already!
Exactly. What garbage the people behind this smear must be!
I think I heard that the US “traditionally” gets to choose the bank head. There is the possibility that this tradition may not continue if he stays. I didn’t see that part in the excerpt.
This is the best explication I’ve seen yet on the WB and the staffers’ opposition to Wolfowitz.
Personally I think Wolfie behaved arrogantly when he assumed he was entitled to engage in such blatant nepotism at an international institution and demoralizing all of its employees and should resign to spare the President any further grief over this matter.
Oops—forgot to put in a cite to the article I meant.
http://kennethandersonlawofwar.blogspot.com/2007/05/bush-administration-weighs-in-on.html
Pretty foul piece of tripe Troll. The Wall Street Journal has been all over this and Wolfowitz asked to be recused regarding his relationship. Just another lefty set-up.
Read this review of Wolfowitz’s honorable attempt to recuse himself which the organization’s board did not accept.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266052,00.html
Begone Troll.
Axis of Soros
The men and motives behind the World Bank coup attempt.
Wednesday, May 9, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT
Mark Malloch Brown spoke Monday to a crowded auditorium at the World Bank’s headquarters, warning that the bank’s mission was “hugely at risk” as long as Paul Wolfowitz remained its president. Only hours earlier, news leaked that a special committee investigating Mr. Wolfowitz had accused him of violating conflict-of-interest rules. A coincidence? We doubt it
=
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010050
Perhaps you are on Soros’ payroll. A paid Troll on the payroll.
Latest breaking news from the UK - -
Wolfowitz’s tenure faces fresh test
By Eoin Callan and Krishna Guha in Washington and Hugh Williamson in Berlin
Published: May 10 2007 02:01 | Last updated: May 10 2007 02:01
Paul Wolfowitz’s tenure as president of the World Bank faces a further test after the emergence of a classified Pentagon report pointing to a fresh conflict of interest apparently involving his girlfriend, Shaha Riza.
The report said Mr Wolfowitz told Pentagon investigators he enlisted the help of a World Bank employee with whom he had a “close personal relationship” in “activity supporting the war” in Iraq when he was deputy secretary of defence.
This is likely to be viewed as a violation of bank rules by the World Bank’s board, according to bank officials.
The board is expected to hear from a special panel in the coming days that Mr Wolfowitz separately broke the bank’s ethics code in his handling of a secondment to the state department for Ms Riza.
Although Ms Riza is thought to be the bank employee referred to in the Pentagon report, the name has been blacked out in a copy of the report obtained by the Financial Times.
People close to the World Bank board said some members hoped an understanding would be reached that Mr Wolfowitz would step down before the board was forced to decide whether to demand his resignation.
Mr Wolfowitz has received measured support from the White House, while Democrats in Congress have called for him to go.
Congressman Barney Frank, chairman of a key committee, on Wednesday called into question whether Democrats would support fresh financing for the bank under Mr Wolfowitz’s leadership.
The comments will add to concerns that European governments could withhold financing if the Bush administration exercises its votes and influence on the board to keep Mr Wolfowitz in place. There was a repeated call for Mr Wolfowitz to resign on Wednesday from Germany, which heads the bank’s 24-nation board.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.