Neo-Conned Again

One common theme among journalists I spoke with today is their frustration at getting anyone from within the Bank to say anything on Zoellick. I know people would and should be cautious, but if I had anything to do with the WB Staff Association, surely this would be a time to flex muscles, no? The Europeans may think twice about rubber stamping if the staff made it clear that another Bush appointee with a reputation for strong arming may not be welcome. Oh well, maybe we’ll have to wait another two years for anyone to learn. In the meanwhile, here’s what we at the 50 Years Is Enough Network have to say about all this. My favourite line: “The best that can be said for [Zoellick] is that, like Wolfowitz, he’ll be an appropriate symbol of what the World Bank has become – an agency dedicated to entrenching U.S. economic domination”.

3 thoughts on “Neo-Conned Again

  1. I’m sure no one at the bank wants to look like a sourpuss before Zoellick even steps in the door. And besides that, according to the bank board, he’s only a nominee. Anyone care to nominate someone else for the job? And as for the board paying attention to the wishes of staff, get a grip. Since when has anyone in management anywhere paid attention to what workers have to say? The bank is not a democracy.

  2. No one at the Bank will say anything negative about someone who should have been chosen two years ago to be the president. Mr. Zoellick is the best qualified neocon, his experience and intellectual capabilities are respected by every one.
    He has big ears and everyone expects he will listen carefully to the staff.

  3. The staff cannot take the lead in deciding who runs the World Bank, or even on how the selection is made. That is the job of the Executive Directors and those who appoint them. There is also a role for outside pressure groups. The Staff Association was legitimately involved in the Wolfowitz affair because rules that affect all staff were broken, and because disinformation was being spread by Wolfowitz’s defenders that was damaging to staff (Riza’s salary was supposedly typical for Bank staff; Bank staff supposedly don’t care about corruption). But the staff and the Staff Association do not run, and should not run, the World Bank.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *