Comments on: Does anybody at all think Kim’s a better candidate than Ngozi?

By: Jeneral28

Jeneral28 — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 21:10:17 +0000

Let me play a single point as mentioned, why hasn’t Jim Kim replied to the CGD/WPost interview-audience discussion? Instead, he, with the support of State and Treasury, is touring the world, asking for support. Sounds like the old agenda doesn’t it?

Nogzi has failures. It may apply that she’s also a neoliberal–she stated that she hates that word. Well, Obama is also a neoliberal.

The point is, do you want transparent global economic governance institution or the same old game? And if you want the same old game, why hasn’t your candidate at least talked?

By: Jets1916

Jets1916 — Sat, 07 Apr 2012 12:44:11 +0000

I apologize for the spelling error. I’m afraid I tend to type fast and my dexterity has always been rather limited. But if thats the only thing you can refute I may have some good points. I would like nothing more than for Africa to be independant and economically viable. Yet it is not and I suppose it hasnt been in many years, since the days of Rhodesia. I certainly did not mean to insult any one, just following a path of logic that is based on facts and history and the belief that if one follows a specific course of action that has the same results time and again than perhaps that result is inevitable and a new course is needed. And certainly many arguments have been made that the tens of billions a year Africa recieves every year from E.U., U.S., and W.B. have done nothing for the average Adrican as the statistics regarding education and poverty have not really changed. The true beneficiaries of this aid are the bloated beauracracies and corrupt governments who are constantly embroiled in scandal. Men like the esteemed President of Zimbabwe, a maniac dictator in a Country with 80% unenployment who forcibly removed white farmers from their homes to “resettle” the land. Until men like that are removed from power and Africa matures and creates their own stable economies and fosters internal industry we will see no real change, just new money following old down into the abyss.

By: Bayobabalola

Bayobabalola — Sat, 07 Apr 2012 09:58:54 +0000

@Jets1916….its African not ‘Afrikan’. See an economically and industrially backward African just corrected your spelling. How does that make you feel?

By: Bayobabalola

Bayobabalola — Sat, 07 Apr 2012 09:58:50 +0000

@Jets1916….its African not ‘Afrikan’. See an economically and industrially backward African just corrected your spelling. How does that make you feel?

By: eaboyeji

eaboyeji — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 10:32:52 +0000

@Jets 1916. Far less than 2% of Nigeria’s total expenditure is aid. We don’t all take aid from America.

By: DanHess

DanHess — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 01:56:54 +0000

Ya gotta love how Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala tosses the terms ‘green growth and climate change’ without any context at all. What does that even mean? Nobody knows, but it sure seems to stimulate everyone’s erogenous zones!

By: Jets1916

Jets1916 — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 17:12:50 +0000

Things have just gotten so far afield of logic and normalcy. So now the correct choice for the world bank presidency is a long time afrikan politician who feels the world bank will succeed or fail on Africa success or failure? How about Nigeria and the entire continent show a few decades of stability and economic growth without endless Euro-American handouts and then we start appointing them to international positions of power. I just dont understand that the whole world can go along with political correctness to the point that to prove something we will appoint an african woman to this position when her country/continent will be recieving (as always) the lions share of cash outlays, endless social program funding, and the endless billions of traditional U.S. foreign aid. The long held P.C. Theology that pouring our tax money into africa will eventually provide us stable allies and trading partners has been proven wrong for decades now, africa’s economic health and viability (just as iceland’s, or Canada’s or 16th century England for that matter) will be decided by their own actions, and since the dawn of recorded time those actions have been overly violent, under educated and contrary to progress as we in the west know it. These ideological wars have been fought in colleges and think tanks and the United Nations for decades and will unfortunately continue, it seems the only Answer that they refuse to find (and the one that logic dictates) is that Africa, and by extension the great majority of Africans, are not capable of performing economically and industrially on their own without extreme Euro-American hands on guidance… ie: rule.

By: chicorei

chicorei — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 17:12:43 +0000

@FelixSalmon: I stand corrected on using the word “sudden.” I guess a better way to have phrased the question is why were you playing up Indra Nooyi (and others) this time around for so long instead of Okonjo-Iweala? Was it just that you didn’t think it was possible so why bother? It’s a genuine question, absent the snark, since Kim is definitely more qualified than Nooyi…

It could also be a start to illuminate what you think the role of the World Bank actually should be and how it should operate, which is critical to determining who the choice should be That’s a larger question which I, at least, have not seen answered by most anyone, including yourself (but perhaps I missed it).

By: PatrickSharma

PatrickSharma — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 17:08:23 +0000

Great post, Felix. I can’t help but be worried by the lack of content in Kim’s statements, as well as his failure to (so far) RSVP for the Center for Global Development and Washington Post’s Q&A.

That said, I think it time to start focusing some of the discussion on what the next World Bank president should do, exactly. (I have some thoughts here: bit.ly/HhBv7I) Ngozi’s statements about speeding up disbursement are interesting, but I wonder how she plans on accomplishing this. I’d love for someone with deep knowledge of the Bank, like @PerKurowski to chime in. Or perhaps to make this a topic of a future post.

By: oseun

oseun — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 16:37:19 +0000

@JOHN411. YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT NGOZI HAS DONE FOR NIGERIA? AS A NATIVE OF THAT COUNTRY, I THINK I STAND A BETTER CHANCE TO EDUCATE YOU THAT THE COMING OF NGOZI HAS BEEN A BLESSING TO NIGERIA. IN HER FIRST COMING, SHE HELP NIGERIA TO WIPE OFF HER DEBT FROM THE PARIS CLUB.

THIS SECOND COMING HAS RESTORED FISCAL DISCIPLINE AND BLOCKING OF CORRUPTION CONDUITS.

By: DanHess

DanHess — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 14:15:45 +0000

I can think of one reason why an Asian is preferable. Asia is the source of most capital in the world these days. Asian countries miight be much less inclined to buy into the World Bank with an African in charge.

You may wish that Asians in Asia think a certain way, but you cannot sprinkle pixie dust and make it so.

The World Bank would need, in the future, to increase its share of resources from the world’s primary source of capital, Asia. Clearly having one of their own at the helm would make Asian nations more willing to buy in.

You don’t need to sell Africa on the World Bank. They will be happy to receive.

By: PerKurowski

PerKurowski — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 13:53:09 +0000

The statutes of the World Bank indicate that “The Executive Directors shall be responsible for the conduct of the general operations of the Bank, and for this purpose, shall exercise all the powers delegated to them by the Board of Governors”

And so, at the end of the day, it is up to these EDs to decide who of the three candidates might be the best president of the World Bank. And frankly, in a case like this, they should not be able to hide behind the skirt of a “my government told me so”

As an ex ED I do not want to put special pressure on my colleagues but the fact is that it would be good for transparency and the World Bank to see who each one of them will vote for and, something truly great, their reasons why.

By: MrRFox

MrRFox — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 08:27:19 +0000

*yawns*
*reads Ash998’s comment*
*thinks – “Yes!”)

Like it actually matters “When you’re talking about a massive bureaucracy like the World Bank” (F.S.) who runs it. It runs for the benefit first-and-always of its own philanthro-poids. “Together” minds support whichever candidate has the greatest likelihood of inflicting mortal damage on the organization.

By: Ash998

Ash998 — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 08:06:16 +0000

Spot on John411 and Abu66. As MD of the Bank Ngozi had years to champion reforms had she been minded to exert her influence. She didn’t. She sat back basking in her elevated position rather than creating waves that would upset the status quo. She’s a hypocrite of the first order.

By: Abulili

Abulili — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 07:37:00 +0000

Felix writes that Ngozi is an “expert in many subject areas, from education to agriculture to manufacturing, and also the differences between the world’s developing regions”, which to me appears to be an oxymoron. More importantly, her statement to Annie Lowrey is also less than convincing. Of course youth unemployment is THE challenge facing both the developed and developing world, you’re not a genius if you’ve discovered that. But she doesn’t offer a single cogent policy responsive to that challenge, much less one that’s been shown to work. And then she actually goes on to babble about green growth and climate change investment opportunities. Being the Left’s mantra, this might be good self-marketing (for the others all they care about is how to maximize US and European financial aid), but how exactly is this the answer to the challenges of the developing world? Reduction of trade barriers, yes; good governance-tied assistance, yes; effective anti-corruption policy, yes; concentration of support to countries which subscribe to and demonstrably encourage economic and other freedom, yes. But please spare us the development babble of the 1970s that has been proven to be counterproductive. None of the existing candidates is a good one. It really doesn’t matter who’s appointed.