The World Bank seems to have a lot of trouble, and by the looks of it, it’s as bloated as all the other big national and international bureaucracies. But at their best, the bureaucracies DO something — they help people.

My problem with the way that the Bush Administration has attempted to “reform” various bureaucracies is that it seems to have transformed big wasteful bureaucracies that were DOING something into big, wasteful bureaucracies led by people incapable of doing their job. I’m generalizing, but I’m thinking of FEMA, EPA, and the World Bank. I’m thinking of appointing people to lead Interior and EPA who actually seem to hate the work that those bureaucracies are supposed to do, and have nothing but contempt for the professional staff of those organizations.

So when a Wolfowitz becomes president of an organization, I expect him to reform it, lead it well, or quit, not to carp about how bad and unfair an organization it is.

(I suppose there are some parallels to being a pastor, although I don’t know anything about your church!)

Enough sermonizing for today.

Thanks for the links! I read each of the articles. I find it interesting that the European board members of the bank are trying to oust Wolfowitz for an alleged conflict of interest that might cost “millions,” but took little action to fight corruption that actually cost “billions.” (I’m getting this information from the third article you linked.) Even if those board members are correct about Wolfowitz’s actions (and I’m unconvinced that they are), there seems to be more at play in their animus toward him than can be explained by the nature of his action.

George

P.S. And thanks for the dialogue! You’re one of the few people to critically engage what I post, and I appreciate your efforts. Without contrary opinions to sharpen my own, I sometimes get intellectually lazy. I hope I’m not becoming such on this issue.

Here’s an article supporting your point of view.

Here’s an opinion piece that condemns Wolfowitz. Admittedly, the writer is known for being a liberal! But then, the WSJ is known for being the mouthpiece of certain elements of the Bush Administration.

And here’s a piece that says that l’affaire Wolfowitz is hampering the work that the Bank is doing.

Bloxham

If the WSJ reporters have reported things accurately, then I think Wolfowitz is innocent of the charge of “conflict of interest” regarding his partner’s salary. He had tried to recuse himself but was told by the World Bank bureaucracy what he had to do. That hardly sounds like corruption. However, you may have better information about this issue (and other issues), so if you respond, please do so with links.

Thank you!

George

It’s time for the World Bank to be disbanded anyway. But Wolfowitz is NOT helping to clean up the house. He’s part of the problem.