http://www.IMFleadership.org

Somehow Alex’s post got the link incorrect.

Cheers.

I had trouble with your link the way it was set up (it led me somewhere else, apparently because of the period at the end or something) but found it at http://www.ifiwatchnet.org/?q=en/featured_blog/336. As someone who isn’t as directly affected by IMF events as I am by WB events, I probably won’t track it quite as closely as I did wordlbankpresident.org, but I’ll keep an eye on it from time to time.

In terms of my clean-cut comment, I was referring both to Zoellick’s style of dress and metaphorically to his likely ability to keep out of trouble better than his predecessor. I was in no way stating that he is a good choice for the World Bank, free of political or ideological baggage. More that his baggage is packaged in a smarter bag (Gucci?), whereas Mr Wolfowitz’s was in a transparent rucksack, visibly weighing him down.

May I suggest that you consider starting up this blog again maybe a year or so before Zoellick’s [first?] five-year term is due to end? (Assuming, of course, that his tenure does not end unexpectedly early.) This could give you a tool to start some early dialogue going on important issues like: Should Zoellick’s re-appointment be automatic or should there be an extensive evaluation process and maybe some consideration of the alternate candidates available? If he does step down in 2012, then how should the next presidential selection process proceed? Etc.

Starting this dialogue EARLY, at least among the activist community (and World Bank staffers), might help garner more attention to the issue of how the president is chosen for two such powerful international organizations. And loud enough dialogue among activists (and staffers) just might help stir up more dialogue at the decision making level as well–ideally BEFORE the usual “we’ve always done things this way” inertia sets in.

I also suggest a parrallel site, www.imfpresident.org (if that URL is available) to track the selection of Rato’s sucessor. As a Bank staffer I naturally pay more attention to events on my side of the street than I do events at IMF. But the presidential selection process of the two institutions are currently so tightly tied together that we cannot possibly reform the one without urging reform in the other. I don’t think we’ll actually change anything in THIS round (it looks like Europe is going to push through THEIR pick, whoever that person will be). But I think it can still be very worthwhile to at least hold the dialogue and bring more attention to the issue. Because then people will remember the next time around and perhaps raise more questions.

Thanks.

Here’s an article by a former Oxfam staff member (now at the UNDP), which demonstrates that the appointment of Zoellick is yet another disaster for the poor:

http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/ffd/2002/1220hypocrisy.htm

Furthermore, he was one of the signatories to the 1998 Project for a New
American Century (PNAC) letter which advocated war against Iraq:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm
(outgoing WB president Wolfowitz was also a signatory)

and he also tried to push Genetically Modified crops/foods on the EU:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3025217.stm

So, he’s someone who pushes a US-style “free trade” agenda (with its associated strings attached), is pro-war and pro-big business. Therefore definitely NOT the right man for the job and certainly not someone who can rebuild the badly damaged reputation of the World Bank.

A big thank you to you and your bloggers who kept us informed and entertained. You certainly did your part to aid in the ouster of Mr. Wolfowitz and you should be proud of the role you played in trying to make the Bank just a little bit more accountable and effective. We will miss you!

World Bank reader.

As for the disgraced Wolfowitz, IFC has given him an office in their building for six months, noting in the announcement to IFC staff and managers that James Wolfensohn was given a similar perk. Aside from being an ex-World Bank President, the comparisons between Paul Wolfowitz and Jim Wolfensohn are meagre, indeed.