Seems like the World Bank is going to be transferred from one wolf to another !! The US President announced his nomination for the post of the President of the World Bank - Paul Wolfowitz.
There were a lot of names doing the rounds for the post with both for a candidate and against a candidate debates running around in the press. But the only person who according to the newsies may not be palatable to the Europeans was Dr Wolfowitz.
Bush has just completed a tour of Europe. He met a battery of EU leaders including the German Chancellor and the French President. It was 'reach out' time for the President who was trying to build back the broken bridges with Europe. He was making all the right noises. Even sounding 'not so hawkish' against Iran, backing the European diplomatic initiative to make Iran fall in line.
The President was finally trying to build a coalition of the willing instead of the coalition of the coerced, portrayed by many in the media and his opponents. Looked like the administration was finally coming round to at least listening if not accomodating, the views of its allies.
And boom ! The President, barely weeks after coming back from his much successfull rendezvous with the European leaders, announces this nomination.
It completely negates all the hard work done. All the bonhomie built up could well simmer down.
I was watching the press conference that the President held this morning. One reporter asked him why he had chosen Paul's name over so many choices.
In his reply, the President said that Dr. Wolfowitz worked well as Deputy Secretary of Defence, as point man in Iraq, in his father's administration and also ambassador to Indonesia. And finally he said "Paul is committed to development."
Well for a person who is going to lead the World Bank which is in the fore-front of poverty eradication, should'nt that person have development as his first and topmost credential , instead of the other way round ??
Atleast from the way the President announced it, it looks like development is Paul's favourite pastime !!
5 comments:
While I intend to passively agree the first few paras of your blog I take exception to the line " ..should'nt that person have development as his first and topmost credential..". That is not probably want of the hour now. The World Bank has been fighting poverty for half a century now. There is no dramatic rise in the living conditions of remote African or other Third World countries ridden by poverty. Organizations like the UN, World Bank have become huge establishments having big obligations, big staff.. And the establishment just works to preserve status quo.
So a person with a development background may just not be sufficient.. WOLFOWITZ may not be the right guy for the job, but a core development background is not just enough in the resume.
Absolutely. Point being development is the Bank's main focus area so the person leading it should have worked on some development work side. But ofcourse that is just not enough, else any and every social worker could lay claim for the post.
He needs lot of diplomatic management and leadership skills too.
But with this selection/nomination, I am not sure. Development issue being his pastime does not augur well.
Especially appalling was the President comparing the nominee's running of the pentagon with that of running the world bank. Both are large organizations he said.
What a comparison !!
Anyways Shiva..first and topmost means that more credentials are to follow but with development being the focus area.
Eswar, your conclusion is based on a logical premise that if you run a organization that produces airplanes, you need to have to knowledge about how airplanes work (or why else you would you need a 'background')
Referring to Jack Welch : Straight from the gut', he makes it very clear that GE produces hundreds of different products in many different industry segments starting from electrics to aeronauticals to washing machines to medical instruments and what not....
There is simply no way, that a man can be expected to have a 'background' in all the products/areas in the company that he is going to run.
One however is expected to be a man 'driven', 'passionate about the cause', 'man of integrity' and who 'believes in the cause' and can 'lead'.
Will leave it to the leaders to judje where in the spectrum, the new presidential-nominee (pun intended) finds himself.
Dear Arvind...do not stretch my statement to fit such a wide argument. You exactly know what I meant.
Can you make an accountant the General of an army, or can you make a doctor run a manufacturing industry, or can you make a police officer head of finance.
My statement is plain and simple. While you may have an IT person in one field move over to another field in IT, you obviously cannot have a fashion designer head the architecture team.
So, if a person is asked to head an organization thats heavily into development and poverty alleviation, is it too much to ask for this person to have had some background in it !!??
Post a Comment