Seething worldwide anger at US President George Walker Bush was reignited last week when he nominated one of his henchman, deputy US defense secretary Paul Wolfowitz, for the position of World Bank president. Wolfowitz, who would take over from James Wolfensohn who is due to step down in June this year, is seen as the prime architect of the illegitimate invasion of Iraq, and is a champion of the free market approach to dealing with poverty. While Bush stresses Wolfowitz’s development credentials, there are many who quite simply view him as a war mongeror.

The appointment is seen as characteristic of Bush's tough approach towards multilateralism in which he seeks to aggressively push the US agenda and establish control over key institutions such as the World Bank. Initial speculation was that other G8 members, and especially the European lobby, would be opposed to the nomination, but Germany has since said it will not oppose the nomination, making a European challenge unlikely. It appears that this is one of the issues that Bush laid the groundwork for in his recent European friendship tour. The pay-back could come with US support for European leadership at the World Trade Organization.

Wolfowitz's role in the Iraq war makes him an unpopular choice for president of the Bank because the invasion and subsequent occupation is opposed in many of the areas of the developing world in which the Bank works. Former chief economist of the World Bank turned critic, Joseph Stiglitz, has warned that the nomination of Wolfowitz risks turning the institution into a hate figure and could spark public protests worldwide.

In this sense the appointment of Wolfowitz would bring into stark focus the links between war and the Bank – something that has been highlighted for some time by staunch critics. And as pointed out at http://www.voiceoftheturtle.org/raj/blog/ the appointment of Wolfowitz offers an opportunity because it makes nonsensical the argument that the World Bank can somehow be reformed and might therefore lead to a united voice against the damaging policies of the institution.

Others have pointed out that the issue of personalities is not as important as the damaging neo-liberal policies carried out, regardless of the figurehead. As Jubilee South said in a statement: "We call on all those concerned to direct their campaign efforts not simply at reversing that decision, but at decommissioning the World Bank itself, holding its owners and directors accountable for the genocidal consequences of its lending and collections, and resisting the neoliberal economic offensive that it is now entrusting Wolfowitz to unambiguously lead."

The cry from many in Africa to this statement would be a resounding ‘Hear, Hear!’

* Compiled by Pambazuka News. For further reading, click on the links below.

http://www.voiceoftheturtle.org/raj/blog/
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=13&ItemID=7460
http://www.jubileesouth.org/
http://www.nu.ac.za/ccs/default.asp?2,40,5,609
http://www.eurodad.org/articles/default.aspx?id=604
http://www.choike.org/nuevo_eng/informes/1752.html
http://www.brettonwoodsproject.org/wolfowitznomination