Some Reactions

AFP: Nigeria World Bank candidate salutes Kim, calls for change

FT: World Bank picks Kim as next head

Economist: Kim for president

The Atlantic: Shocking News About the Next World Bank Boss

BBC: Africa’s World Bank hopes dashed as Okonjo-Iweala loses

The Telegraph: A 20th century bank facing 21st century problems

Irish Times: World Bank accused of lack of transparency after US chief chosen

The Conversation: Three-Card Trick: Kim is new World Bank President


Oxfam sums it up

 

Oxfam’s Elizabeth Stuart said: “Dr. Kim is an excellent choice for World Bank president and a true development hero. But we’ll never know if he was the best candidate for the job, because there was no true and fair competition.”

“The world deserved better than a selection process with a forgone conclusion. Poor and emerging countries are insisting the Bank be more accountable and open in how it does business. This sham process has damaged the institution, and sullied Dr. Kim’s appointment.”

South Africa expresses “serious concerns” about World Bank process

FT reports that “South Africa on Monday expressed serious concerns about the transparency of the process to select the next head of the World Bank”

Pravin Gordhan, South Africa’s finance minister told reporters  “From what I’m hearing there are serious concerns about the levels of transparency. And when we link that to the third element, which is has this process met the merit-based criteria, I think we are going to find that the process falls short,”

Who is responsible?

If, as expected, Dr. Kim is announced tomorrow as the new President of the World Bank, who do you suppose should be held responsible by the public, and history, for what promises to be an ineffective and tarnished presidency?

Is it the fault of Obama, who now seems to stand for ” a change no one should believe in”, the BRICS that turned out to be as soft as egg shells, or the board of executive directors which abandoned their responsibilities , according to the bylaws of the organization, and proved that they are simply little more than chess pieces for their Capitals?

If the process is now completely tarnished, who should be held responsible? 


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.