Wolfowitz for World Bank Post

T

tehuti

Guest
Bush Throws Support Behind Wolfowitz for World Bank Post
By DAVID STOUT

WASHINGTON, March 16 - President Bush said today he would nominate Paul D. Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of defense who was one of the architects of the administration's campaign to topple Saddam Hussein, as president of the World Bank.

Mr. Wolfowitz, 61, would replace John Wolfensohn, who is stepping down as the head of the bank on June 1 upon completion of his second five-year term.

Mr. Bush called Mr. Wolfowitz "a compassionate, decent man who will do a fine job."

The announcement is virtually certain to stir debate, especially in Europe, since many European countries strongly opposed the American-led invasion of Iraq and might see the selection of Mr. Wolfowitz as deliberately provocative.

On the other hand, even though Mr. Wolfowitz is not widely regarded as an expert on development, he once served as assistant secretary of state for East Asia and as Ambassador to Indonesia, posts in which he oversaw United States policy for parts of the developing world.

By tradition, the United States chooses the head of the World Bank, a 184-member institution whose mission is to try to reduce poverty, while the Europeans pick the director of the International Monetary Fund, which tries to promote financial stability in emerging countries.

Since the United States is by far the largest shareholder in the World Bank, Mr. Bush has clout as well as tradition on his side, whatever objections may arise to Mr. Wolfowitz in Europe.

On the other hand, European leaders who dislike Mr. Wolfowitz may be tempted to defy tradition and contest the nomination - especially since President Bill Clinton did just that in blocking the appointment of Caio Koch Weser, the German candidate to head the International Monetary Fund, because Mr. Clinton considererd Mr. Weser too weak.

President Bush confirmed reports that he was nominating Mr. Wolfowitz at a White House news conference, which was called this morning.

Mr. Wolfowitz has been included among the cadre of administration officials who have been labeled "neo-conservatives." As such, he has been a firm believer that overthrowing the Baghdad dictator was an opportunity to sow the seeds of democracy throughout the Middle East, and thus impose a measure of long-range stability upon the region.

But, because violence and chaos in Iraq has not abated in the nearly two years since Mr. Hussein was deposed, Mr. Wolfowitz and his like-minded colleagues have come under fresh criticism. But President Bush has remained steadfast in his position that the sea-change that the United States brought about in Iraq will be worth it in the long run, no matter the cost.

As recently as a week ago, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, Lawrence Di Rita, insisted that President Bush had asked Mr. Wolfowitz to stay on as the No. 2 man in the Defense Department. There was no telling whether Mr. Di Rita was misinformed, or whether the White House's thinking changed in the ensuing days.

Mr. Wolfowitz has been deputy defense secretary since early 2001. From 1989 to 1993, he was under secretary of defense for policy. For three years during the administration of President Ronald Reagan,he served as Ambassador to Indonesia.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/16/i...&en=a89b74f3f9df28e8&ei=5094&partner=homepage
 
T

tehuti

Guest
It maybe just me, but it seems as if, Bush's recent appointment to the UN and now Wolfowitz for the World Bank are an overt F*** You to the United Nations and European leadership that did not support his pre-emptive invasion of Iraq (mentioned in the article).
 

dyhawk

Potential Star
Registered
Lets Keep in Mind Wolfowitz is a neo conservative and a racist who was one of the co-authors of the policies that Bush is acting uppon if he is appointed to the World bank he will distroy the economies of the Middle East countries, Africa and most third world nations in the interest of Empire.
 

Greed

Star
Registered
dyhawk said:
Lets Keep in Mind Wolfowitz is a neo conservative and a racist who was one of the co-authors of the policies that Bush is acting uppon if he is appointed to the World bank he will distroy the economies of the Middle East countries, Africa and most third world nations in the interest of Empire.
its unfortunate that you dont have a positive outlook on his appointment because the pussies in europe already said they wont fight it. very sad day for the people of france. america gets its way and a jew is taking over a powerful international position.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050321/bs_afp/worldbankuswolfowitz_050321160728
 
T

tehuti

Guest
its unfortunate that you dont have a positive outlook on his appointment because the pussies in europe already said they wont fight it.

European members wouln't fight it because a quid pro quo relationship exists in the nomination of appointments.

By tradition, the United States chooses the head of the World Bank, a 184-member institution whose mission is to try to reduce poverty, while the Europeans pick the director of the International Monetary Fund, which tries to promote financial stability in emerging countries.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Greed

Star
Registered
except they owe america one because clinton opposed some IMF candidate.

i guess the pussies are just saving it for some other time.
 
T

tehuti

Guest
Greed said:
i'm not about to read 12 pages of wolf chat. what page are you referring to directly?
On page 4, it states:

James D. Wolfensohn, President, World Bank: Well on the turning point I cannot really—Ihave often thought of that question—but I cannot really point to a single turning point. The only thing I could draw from was my experience in my family, which although not endowed with much money always took a view with regard to charity and regard to others; that you would take in others, and assist others in anyway that you could. I happen to be of the Jewish religion and it is part really of our faith, so I grew up with this sort of sense of service.

Page 4.
 

dyhawk

Potential Star
Registered
the european countries don't really care they now they will survive.............. the only reason france and germany stood up against the war was because they were promised contracts for the Oil field in Iraq before america invaded.....................I just hope it doesn't go through maybe some one will kill the bastards before they do more damage...............couldn't happen to better people
 

Greed

Star
Registered
I just hope it doesn't go through maybe some one will kill the bastards before they do more damage...............couldn't happen to better people
nice to see you're offering sensible opposition as well.

always nice to see people fulfill their obligation to humanity.
 

Makkonnen

The Quizatz Haderach
BGOL Investor
IMF and WorldBank are fronts for further european dominance of people of color who are attempting to recover from hundreds of years of colonial rule and oppression
 

Greed

Star
Registered
Makkonnen said:
IMF and WorldBank are fronts for further european dominance of people of color who are attempting to recover from hundreds of years of colonial rule and oppression
and...

come on, you know you want to say it.

and...they should all "___ ___ ___."
 

Makkonnen

The Quizatz Haderach
BGOL Investor
You are projecting a little bit. Please refresh my memory as to where I said that.
It was funnier when you were deathwish wishing rotfl

Again brilliant response. Thanks for correcting me.
 
T

tehuti

Guest
Greed said:
except they owe america one because clinton opposed some IMF candidate.

i guess the pussies are just saving it for some other time.

Anne Krueger was an acting Managing Director of the IMF, not the incumbent, and served for only 3 months (March 2004 - May 2004). Obviously, this was not during Clinton's presidency.
 

dyhawk

Potential Star
Registered
Greed said:
nice to see you're offering sensible opposition as well.

always nice to see people fulfill their obligation to humanity.

Come on i am not stupid i now i cannot stop it.............but a man can always dream one day justice will prevail until then i can wish him all the best in his new post, cancer, heart disease and bad itchy big red things like golf balls all over his body

See i am a humanitarian
 

Greed

Star
Registered
Africa Will Be First On My List - Wolfowitz

Africa Will Be First On My List - Wolfowitz
March 29, 2005
Posted to the web March 29, 2005

Jonathan Katzenellenbogen
Johannesburg

PAUL Wolfowitz, the man whose nomination by the Bush administration to head the World Bank sparked a worldwide uproar, is trying to reach out to developing countries and calm anxiety over what he will do once in office.

In an interview with Business Day [click here for a transcript] at the weekend, Wolfowitz said Africa would be his priority, and he would act as an international public servant and not as a representative of the US if his appointment was approved.

He also said his mission at the bank would be economic development. The only political loan conditions he favoured, he said, were those which improved governance and helped fight corruption, as these improved the effectiveness of aid.

Some critics fear the deputy US defence secretary, widely viewed as the architect of the Iraq war, would not be predisposed to a multilateral institution and would push for political goals and favour countries close to the US.

But Wolfowitz said Africa was the bank's "first priority" and the institution had a "uniquely important role in Africa. Some of the most terrible conditions of poverty are aggravated by HIV and malaria," he said.

Wolfowitz said he would travel to the continent early on as part of an effort to set the bank's priorities. The only possible change from current policy that he hinted at was the possibility of more support for infrastructure.

Pointing to the importance of rural roads for agricultural development, Wolfowitz said he was, "a little bit surprised that the bank has pulled out of infrastructure support as much as it has".

In setting priorities, he said: "I would have to know a lot more and hear from a lot more people because it isn't just what I think that matters, it really has to be something that brings the various donors together and brings them together in a way that the recipients believe in."

Wolfowitz rejected criticism of his lack of experience in dealing with economic development issues, saying that his three years as the US ambassador to Indonesia had given him exposure. "I think I would be the first president of the World Bank who has actually lived in a developing country."

http://allafrica.com/stories/200503290079.html
 

Greed

Star
Registered
World Bank Board Approves Wolfowitz

World Bank Board Approves Wolfowitz
Thu Mar 31, 1:39 PM ET

By JEANNINE AVERSA, AP Economics Writer

WASHINGTON - The World Bank's board on Thursday unanimously approved the nomination of Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, an architect of the Iraq war, to be the next president of the 184-nation development bank.

President Bush earlier this month surprised the international community by recommending Wolfowitz for the job. Wolfowitz's hard-line foreign policy stance has made him a target of critics at home and abroad. Wolfowitz, 61, will take the helm of the development bank on June 1.

The bank's stated mission is to fight poverty and improve the living standards of people in developing countries. It lends around $20 billion a year to developing countries for various projects, including roads, schools and fighting AIDS.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050331/ap_on_bi_ge/world_bank_wolfowitz_3
 

Rastaman

wannabe star
Registered
Hotep


Hmmmmmn! It is not too difficult to view the appointment of Bolton at the UN and Wolfowitz at the World Bank not as a coincidence, but as part of a right wing strategy to intimidate and bully all developing countries around the world. One may conclude that how these less fortunate countries vote at the UN will be a determining factor when they apply to the World Bank or IMF for assistance. But how does this institution really operate? What is its organizational structure?

I respectfully posit the view that the World Bank is a badly misunderstood organization.

This may seem obvious, but let me for the record state that, first and foremost, it is a BANK. That’s it, A BANK.

It has no money of its own. It is in the business of lending other people's money. The money is raised in global capital markets by issuing securities.

Now then, in order to attract these capital flows for financing its lending activities to developing countries, it must seek to maintain an AAA bond rating that would make persons like Que, who are loaded with dough, invest in its instruments. Que will likely never invest his money in Cuba, but will more probably invest his millions in the World Bank, simply because of its AAA credit rating.

This means that the Bank cannot do a Busch and be reckless with the public purse. Like every bank, it has to establish and maintain underwriting guidelines that raise the probability of getting its money back.

It is a bank.

The bank must ensure that it gets its money back from Senegal, so that it can turn around and lend to Jamaica. On the day that it ceases to hold borrowers to their contractual commitments to repay their loans, it will cease to be a bank and they will be forced to declare the institution insolvent and close down the organization. Get my drift?

IT IS A BANK.

So I must conclude that it is obliged to do what banks do in order to ensure that it remains a bank.

So, why can’t Wolfowitz and send all the Bank's money to Bush 43 in Texas?

Its 184 member countries own the bank. There is an Executive Board of Governors who is elected by the member countries. This is not exactly Busch down on Pennsylvania Avenue, two blocks away, issuing an Executive order that directs the sprawling U.S. bureaucracy to respond. And to me this makes all the difference in the world.

This Executive Board of Governors is the body that makes high level broad funding and policy decisions for the World Bank. I fully expect then to have no-good worthless Republican Wolfowitz out on his backside so fast, it will make your head
swim. And, Wolfowitz knows this. He is an unmitigated jackass, but he is no dummy.

The World Bank is not the Pentagon and Busch does not run it. They are in two very different worlds.

The Bank’s mission is not an easy one. It has made enormous progress but the task of eradicating poverty around the world is so great that they have barely scratched the surface.

The Bank is an extensive establishment. If we focus on the organizational structure and on its mission, the prudent observer is likely to share the views that I have just expressed. If we ignore the organizational structure, then we can arrive at any kind of conclusion we want.

You name it, you got it. It is largely a ceremonial post, so to speak. Fukk’im, but I’m not that concerned.



Hotep
Rasta.
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
A good expose on the fundamentals of the world bank, however, it contains an inaccuracy thats not germane to the discussion.

QueEx
 

Greed

Star
Registered
Wolfowitz honeymoon at World Bank appears over

Wolfowitz honeymoon at World Bank appears over
Sat Jan 28, 9:47 PM ET

Barely eight months after taking office, World Bank president Paul Wolfowitz is fulfilling the fears of some staffers who looked askance at the hawkish former Pentagon number two's appointment.

"Communications with the management are pretty much non-existent, they do not understand the culture of the Bank," said one official at the international lender who, like other disaffected staffers, declined to give her full name.

"At first, we wanted to give him a chance," she said.

The honeymoon period for Wolfowitz seems to have been short-lived following his replacement of World Bank chief James Wolfensohn last June.

Many at the organisation had grave misgivings at the US government's nomination of a figure who was the "neoconservative" deputy to US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and a prime architect of the war in Iraq.

Those concerns were quieted initially by Wolfowitz's promises to continue the World Bank's action against global poverty and his insistence that he wanted to listen to the collective expertise present in its ranks.

But members of staff say that discontent has begun to simmer, in particular at the appointment by Wolfowitz of former US administration insiders to senior positions as he promotes an aggressive campaign against corruption.

Some appointments were uncontroversial, such as his choice of Swedish national Lars Thunel as head of the International Financial Corporation, the Bank's lending arm, and of Italian Vincenzo La Via as chief financial officer.

But other job placements have caused a stink, notably the naming this month of Suzanne Rich Folsom as director of the World Bank's Department of Institutional Integrity, its anti-corruption unit.

The Republican lawyer, who is close to the White House, now keeps tabs on all of the Bank's 10,000 personnel in Washington and around the world to ensure they are administering funds cleanly.

Rich Folsom, whose husband leads the International Republican Institute, had already been serving as an adviser in Wolfowitz's private office since June.

Wolfowitz has brought in his Pentagon aide Kevin Kellems, who was also spokesman to Vice President Dick Cheney, as his special adviser and director of strategy for external affairs.

Robin Cleveland, Wolfowitz's new counsellor, was formerly associate director of the Office of Management and Budget in the White House.

The World Bank's staff association, its de-facto trade union, says Wolfowitz's appointments risk opening the organisation to charges of hypocrisy when it demands transparency of the poor countries that receive its aid.

"In order to be effective as an institution, we must exemplify the recommendations we make to others," it said in a letter to Wolfowitz that was distributed to all staff members and obtained by AFP.

"It sends the wrong message for positions such as these to wear the dual hats of director and counsellor in the president's office: a practice for which there is no precedent and which has raised questions about independence and objectivity," it said.

Aggrieved staffers say the aides brought in by Wolfowitz have retained a mind-set forged in the very different culture of the Republican administration of President George W. Bush.

"They don't seem to understand it's not Washington but an international organisation," one high-ranking insider told the Financial Times.

"The executives have insulted us. They don't trust us."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/2006012...MeFOrgF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl
 

Greed

Star
Registered
Wolfowitz looks at opening World Bank Iraq office

Wolfowitz looks at opening World Bank Iraq office
By Lesley Wroughton
1 hour, 20 minutes ago

World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz is considering expanding bank operations in Iraq, which would put his agency at the center of rebuilding from a war he helped plan as the Pentagon's former No. 2 official.

Senior bank officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because no final decision had been made, said key donor countries including Britain, Japan, Germany and Denmark are pressuring Wolfowitz to establish a Baghdad office.

The development agency has not had a Iraq office since an August 19, 2003, bombing at U.N. headquarters in Iraq killed a bank employee. A consultant, with a staff of seven Iraqis, is paid by the World Bank looks after its affairs in Iraq.

No World Bank staff would be forced to accept an Iraq assignment, the officials said.

In recent weeks, Wolfowitz sent a fact-finding mission to Iraq, and he was now examining security matters and several reconstruction-related issues, officials said.

The possibility of a new World Bank office revives attention to Wolfowitz's role as an architect of the Iraq war. Many critics have accused the Bush administration and the Pentagon in particular of failing to plan for a post-invasion Iraq, as violence rages three years after Saddam Hussein's ouster.

Michael O'Hanlon, a reconstruction expert at Washington's Brookings Institute, said Wolfowitz's history with Iraq "complicates everything."

"He is a very smart man," O'Hanlon said, "but he is also obviously very controversial in his basic support of the Iraq invasion."

Wolfowitz's predecessor as World Bank president, Jim Wolfensohn, resisted pressure from U.S. lawmakers to return bank reconstruction experts to Iraq after the 2003 bombing.

Since the attack, the World Bank has operated from an office in neighboring Amman, Jordan. However, Iraqi officials have complained about the burden of traveling to Amman to consult with the World Bank. In December, Barham Salah, a Kurdish leader, wrote to Wolfowitz urging the bank's full engagement in rebuilding.

"Reconstruction is an important part of the World Bank's mission -- from Bosnia and Afghanistan to Liberia and Iraq," a senior World Bank official told Reuters. "The objectivity the World Bank brings is greatly valued by donors from around the world, as well as host governments."

DONOR PRESSURE

U.N. representatives recently met Wolfowitz and urged the bank to help with Iraq's major problems of financial management and civil-service reform.

"There has been a need for the bank to be in Iraq," said James Dobbins, director of the International Security and Defense Policy Center at Rand Corp.. He said, however, the violence in Iraq could limit bank activities.

Other analysts note that the U.S. State Department is winding down its $20 billion Iraq reconstruction program, which focused on large electricity and water projects that have failed to deliver desired results.

O'Hanlon said the bank could offer a "fresh set of eyes," act as an independent broker and generate much-needed employment for Iraqis.

Experts estimate the cost of resuming an expatriate mission in Baghdad at around $1 million a year. "It's not too soon to go into Iraq, but the security issue is extremely serious," a bank official working on reconstruction projects noted.

Others note that if the World Bank expands its presence in Iraq, more international agencies and donor countries would be encouraged to follow.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060402...RxZ.3QA;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Turmoil Grows for Wolfowitz at World Bank

<font size="5"><center>Turmoil Grows for Wolfowitz at World Bank </font size><font size="4">
Former deputy secretary of defense and architect of the Iraq war,
now president of the World Bank was thrown into turmoil by the
disclosure that he had helped arrange a pay raise for his girlfriend
at the time of her transfer from the bank to the State Department,
where she remained on the bank payroll</font size></center>

New York Times
By STEVEN R. WEISMAN
Published: April 13, 2007


WASHINGTON, April 12 — Paul D. Wolfowitz’s tenure as president of the World Bank was thrown into turmoil on Thursday by the disclosure that he had helped arrange a pay raise for his companion at the time of her transfer from the bank to the State Department, where she remained on the bank payroll.

In a chaotic day of revelations and meetings at a normally staid institution, Mr. Wolfowitz apologized for his role in the raise and transfer of Shaha Ali Riza, his companion, to a few hundred staff members assembled in the bank building atrium, only to be greeted by booing, catcalls and cries for his resignation.

Earlier, the bank’s staff association had declared that it was “impossible for the institution to move forward with any sense of purpose under the present leadership.” The association had helped spearhead an investigation into Ms. Riza’s transfer and raise, details of which came into the open in the last 24 hours.

The events injected a new ugliness into what had already been a bitter rift between Mr. Wolfowitz and many of the bank’s employees, who have questioned his suitability for the job as a former deputy secretary of defense and architect of the Iraq war, and have challenged many of his policies at the bank, especially those cracking down on corruption in which he suspended aid to several countries without consulting the board.

The World Bank’s 24-member executive board, the body that elected Mr. Wolfowitz to the job after he was nominated by President Bush in 2005, held hurried meetings throughout the day amid mounting speculation that it might reprimand him or ask him to resign.

[In a statement released early Friday, the board said it would “move expeditiously to reach a conclusion on possible actions to take.” The board also released documents related to an investigation.]

Shortly after 10 p.m. a bank official released a statement from Mr. Wolfowitz to the board members saying that “in the interests of transparency,” he was requesting the “immediate public release of all documents related to the board’s current review of the case involving myself and Ms. Riza.” The statement appeared to reflect a concern by the bank president that he was being tarred by selective leaks.

Whatever the outcome, the controversy appeared certain to produce more meetings and engulf delegates at the annual spring session of finance ministry officials in Washington, sponsored by the bank and the International Monetary Fund.

Mr. Wolfowitz apologized at a morning news conference and at the atrium meeting after the staff association disclosed that it had found a dated memorandum from Mr. Wolfowitz to a vice president for human resources at the bank, apparently instructing him to agree to the terms of a raise and reassignment for Ms. Riza.

The transfer and a subsequent raise eventually took her to a pay of $193,590 from $132,660, tax-free because of her status as a diplomat, and exceeding the salaries of cabinet members. “In hindsight, I wish I had trusted my original instincts and kept myself out of the negotiations,” Mr. Wolfowitz said.

“I made a mistake, for which I am sorry,” he added, pleading for “some understanding” of the “painful personal dilemma” he faced when he left the Pentagon to become bank president. Mr. Wolfowitz said he had been seeking to avoid a conflict of interest by having Ms. Riza, with whom he had a personal relationship, transferred from his supervision.

What drove the anger at the bank was not that Mr. Wolfowitz had denied earlier that he had sought Ms. Riza’s transfer, but that he had been less than fully candid in discussing it until documents surfaced showing his direct role. His earlier insistence that he had consulted with ethics officials was disputed by some of them, who say they were not involved in the salary aspect of discussions.

Mr. Wolfowitz, who is divorced, has been close to Ms. Riza for several years, according to people who have worked with them. She was a communications officer in the Middle East and North Africa bureau of the bank when Mr. Wolfowitz arrived in 2005, and was transferred that September to the Middle East and North Africa bureau to help set up a semi-independent foundation to promote democracy in that region.

Her initial supervisor at the State Department was Elizabeth Cheney, whose father, Vice President Dick Cheney, has been a longtime associate of Mr. Wolfowitz. Ms. Riza now serves as a consultant to the foundation, the Foundation for the Future, while drawing her World Bank salary, the State Department said.

Mr. Wolfowitz, in his talk to the bank staff, essentially implied that his fate was up to the board. “I proposed to the board that they establish some mechanism to judge whether the agreement reached was a reasonable outcome,” he said of the arrangement for Ms. Riza. “I will accept any remedies they propose.”

He also appealed to the staff members to look beyond his role in planning the Iraq war and join him in fighting poverty in Africa and other missions of the bank.

“For those people who disagree with the things that they associate with me in my previous job, I’m not in my previous job,” he said.

Many bank officials said board members were likely to wait to decide what to do after checking with their finance ministers, many of whom were on their way to Washington for the annual meetings.

A decision as big as whether to remove Mr. Wolfowitz or encourage him to step down would be likely to involve leaders of the bank’s main donor countries in discussions with President Bush, bank officials said.

The bank’s five largest donors — the United States, Japan, Germany, France and Britain — each nominate one board member, but their voting power is based on shares in the bank. The United States, with 16 percent, has the largest share, making it customary for the White House to nominate the bank president.

But the bank has been gripped by resentment for years over the perception that the United States has too much influence. That trend reflects declining American influence at the bank at a time when European and Asian countries have gained in economic clout.

There is speculation among bank officials that if Mr. Wolfowitz leaves, European members and others will agitate for more of a say in choosing his successor, a possible factor in whether Mr. Bush decides to go along with his removal.

At the White House, Tony Fratto, a spokesman, said: “Of course, President Wolfowitz has our full confidence” and in dealing with the controversy over his involvement with Ms. Riza, “he has taken full responsibility and is working with the executive board to resolve it.”

The storm over Mr. Wolfowitz has been brewing for a week, following disclosures by the bank’s staff association and the Government Accountability Project, an independent watchdog group, that Ms. Riza had received an unusually large raise. They questioned whether the proper procedures had been involved.

The controversy gained steam after the issue was mentioned by Al Kamen in his Washington Post column. The Financial Times has also disclosed details of the matter.

Subsequently, Mr. Wolfowitz asserted that he had consulted the board and the bank’s general counsel, the board’s ethics committee director, and the human resources director to arrange the transfer.

These officials then contradicted Mr. Wolfowitz, saying that while they supported the transfer and a raise, they were not involved in the amount. Alison Cave, chairwoman of the bank’s staff association, said the amount of the raise and the procedures followed seemed to violate bank rules. Ms. Cave also said the records showed that Ms. Riza was to return to the bank at the higher salary level and be given a rating of “outstanding” in her performance reviews while with the foundation.

Mr. Wolfowitz did not deny his involvement, but Thursday was the first day that evidence surfaced of his direct role.

Bank officials said they were somewhat mystified that the details of the transfer, worked out in 2005, did not get out until now. Some attributed it to the changed landscape in Washington.

Mr. Wolfowitz has also been undeniably weakened by his recent tangles with the board..

For example, as part of his broad anticorruption drive, Mr. Wolfowitz for a time suspended aid to India, Chad, Kenya and other countries without consulting the board. Uzbekistan’s aid was suspended after it ousted American troops in 2005, leading to charges of political motivation.

Last month, the bank adopted a new anticorruption policy that insisted that Mr. Wolfowitz consult board members, and it placed other restrictions on his ability to act. Resentment of Mr. Wolfowitz has extended to his two top aides, Robin Cleveland and Kevin Kellems, both of whom worked with him on defense matters in the Bush administration. Although some bank officials said the board might have decided to reprimand or dismiss one or both of them for the salary increase, that was no longer deemed a way out of the crisis for Mr. Wolfowitz.

He also appeared a victim of his own declaration that he would bring a new era of accountability to the bank. He boasted that he had doubled the staff of the public integrity division so it could prosecute cases of graft against corporations and bank employees, stirring resentment throughout the bank that he saw them all as corrupt.

Some bank officials, speaking anonymously so they could be candid, said that instead of ousting Mr. Wolfowitz, the board might prefer that he remain but in a weakened position.

“It’s a coin toss right now whether Wolfowitz stays,” one official said. “But the board might prefer to have a weak president dangling by the thread so they can run the policies themselves for the next two years.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/13/world/13cnd-wolfowitz.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Re: Turmoil Grows for Wolfowitz at World Bank

<font size="5"><center>The Wolf is at the exit door </font size></center>

Asia Times
By Emad Mekay
Apr 14, 2007

WASHINGTON - The World Bank's staff association, which represents 10,000 employees, on Thursday asked bank president Paul Wolfowitz to step down amid charges that he gave his girlfriend, a bank employee, improper pay increases and attempted to cover it up.

The association made the call during an informal press conference inside the bank at which dozens of employees showed up. It is the first time anyone inside the Washington-



headquartered institution has demanded his ouster.

The gathering became dramatic when Wolfowitz himself appeared uninvited and sought to defend his actions.

"The president must acknowledge that his conduct has compromised the integrity and effectiveness of the World Bank Group and has destroyed the staff's trust in his leadership," said a statement from the staff association signed by its chairwoman, Alison Cave. "He must act honorably and resign."

The call came less than an hour after Wolfowitz issued his own statement. "I made a mistake, for which I am sorry," said the 64-year-old World Bank president.

The Staff Association said it decided to call for his resignation even though the bank's board, which runs the institution's day-to-day affairs, announced that it was prepared to investigate officially the allegations that Wolfowitz used his position to enrich Shaha Riza, a bank employee with whom he had a personal relationship, through large pay hikes that violated bank protocols.

The association said it feared that the board might not act quickly enough, and called for the release of all relevant documents, including a memorandum from Wolfowitz to the human-resources vice president instructing him to second Riza to the US State Department on a generous package that brought her salary to US$193,000 a year - $7,000 more than that earned by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

Wolfowitz defended himself on Thursday, saying that he had already sought the advice of the ethics committee at the bank and that he had acted "in good faith".

He also said he was trying to ward off a possible legal problem for the bank. He did not elaborate on whether Riza had threatened to sue the bank if she was involuntarily assigned to the State Department - a necessary move since bank employees who are personally involved may not work together.

"This was an involuntary reassignment and I believed there was a legal risk if this was not resolved by mutual agreement," he said. "I take full responsibility for the details."

But Wolfowitz' statement did not allay concerns among staff that he might have placed his girlfriend's interests before the institution's.

The staff association says, for example, that there was no representation by the bank's legal counsel during negotiations of the new contract for Riza, although her own lawyer was present.

Wolfowitz has taken several hits over the past week, the last of which came from Ad Melkert, former chairman of the ethics committee, who denied that the committee directed or agreed to Riza's contract terms, as the bank president alleged.

The staff association also said that the former general counsel of the Bank, Roberto Danino, rejected the terms for Riza's reassignment, leading to his exclusion by Wolfowitz from the actual contract negotiations.

The association said the affair is taking a toll on morale inside the bank. "It therefore seems impossible for the institution to move forward with any sense of purpose under the present leadership, especially in our endeavor to assist governments and their people in improving their own governance," it said.

The controversy has been particularly embarrassing for Wolfowitz and the bank because since he came to office in 2005, he has sought to make an anti-corruption crusade the signature of his tenure.

Last year, he announced a "long-term strategy" for using the bank's funds and expertise to help developing countries rid their governments of bribe-taking and other dishonest practices.

But even as he assumed responsibility for decisions related to Riza, Wolfowitz went on the offensive, implying that the staff's reaction may have been motivated by displeasure with his role in the Pentagon as one of the main architects of the US invasion and later occupation of Iraq, now in its fifth year and exacting huge human and financial costs.

"For those people who disagree with the things that they associate me with in my previous job, I'm not in my previous job," Wolfowitz said in a statement. "I'm not working for the US government; I'm working for this institution and its 185 shareholders."

Wolfowitz came to the World Bank in mid-2005 from his post as the US deputy secretary of defense.

His appointment to the World Bank sent ripples through many at the institution and within development circles who feared that his neo-conservative credentials and close association with the carnage caused by the Iraq war could undermine the bank's image as one of the world's leading development agencies.

But the controversy over Riza's salary increases has mostly skirted his role in the Iraq war - with Wolfowitz himself bringing it up.

(Inter Press Service)




http://atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/ID14Dj01.html
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Re: Turmoil Grows for Wolfowitz at World Bank

LMBAO:


<font size="5"><center>Wolfowitz Seeks African Leaders’ Backing</font size></center>

New York Times
By STEVEN R. WEISMAN
Published: April 15, 2007

WASHINGTON, April 14 — Paul D. Wolfowitz, seeking support for his beleaguered leadership as president of the World Bank, is turning for help to the one group at the bank that aides say he has focused on the most, the leaders of sub-Saharan Africa, bank officials say.

At a news conference on Saturday, as hundreds of delegates circulated in Washington and speculated about Mr. Wolfowitz’s future, several finance ministers of African countries said he had done an outstanding job in increasing aid to Africa and demanding an end to corruption.

“He has been a visionary,” said Antoinette Sayeh, finance minister of Liberia, which has received considerable bank assistance following its conflicts of a couple years ago. “We’re very grateful for his leadership in getting where we are today. We look forward to that continuing.”

Rama Sithanen, a deputy prime minister of Mauritius, said Mr. Wolfowitz had been “supportive of the reforms in our country.” He said Mr. Wolfowitz “has apologized for what has happened” regarding the favoritism shown to his companion, Shaha Ali Riza, who is employed at the bank, and should be dealt with in a way that was “commensurate” with his mistakes.

Mr. Sithanen and two others at the news conference said, however, that they would accept whatever the bank’s 24-member board decided about Mr. Wolfowitz’s future and assumed that the bank’s pro-Africa policies would continue no matter who is leading the institution.

At issue is Mr. Wolfowitz’s handling of the transfer, promotion and raise of Ms. Riza at the bank when he arrived in 2005. She was detailed to the State Department and given a raise of nearly 50 percent in a manner that the bank’s staff association said violated bank rules. The association has called for him to resign.

Late Saturday night, in a new effort to appeal to the staff for understanding, Mr. Wolfowitz sent out e-mail messages to all bank employees calling their attention to documents released Friday. The documents show that he made efforts in 2005 to avoid conflicts of interest at the bank over his relationship with Ms. Riza.

The bank’s board has been considering the matter but members were more involved this weekend in marathon meetings with delegates from 180 countries than with Mr. Wolfowitz’s personal problems.

Bank officials critical of Mr. Wolfowitz acknowledge that he has concentrated considerable energy on Africa and received praise from African leaders, but they also accuse him of cynically trying to rally Africans dependent on his good will in recent weeks, as criticism of his leadership has mounted.

Several bank officials, asking not to be identified in order to avoid reprisals, charged that Mr. Wolfowitz was seeking backing from Africa as a kind of political base to counter the growing resentment among European leaders over his policies, particularly his anticorruption campaign.

The bank’s board acts as a kind of legislature setting policies as an equal weight with the president, and in some ways Mr. Wolfowitz’s time in office has resembled a tug of war between two branches of government.

The board usually decides matters by consensus, but its power centers are the United States, Japan and Europe, the largest donors to its $20 billion annual lending and assistance programs. The board is considering Mr. Wolfowitz’s future but getting guidance from more than 180 finance ministries around the world.

The comments of top officials here indicated most were willing to wait for the board’s judgment, but also seemed to accept Mr. Wolfowitz’s apology on Thursday.

“I have total confidence in the institution of the bank to handle this issue,” said Rodrigo de Rato, managing director of the International Monetary Fund, noting that Mr. Wolfowitz had acknowledged his error.

Gordon Brown, Britain’s chancellor of the exchequer, echoed that view, noting that Mr. Wolfowitz had apologized. “I think we’ve got to respect the board’s process,” he said.

Mr. Wolfowitz held meetings behind the scenes with these ministers and others in town for the annual session sponsored by the bank and the International Monetary Fund.

In a reflection of wariness among Europeans, Germany’s minister in charge of the World Bank, Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul, spoke to Reuters and Bloomberg news services of the importance of preserving the bank’s “moral authority” and suggested that even though Mr. Wolfowitz has apologized, he might need to leave for the good of the bank.

“He has to decide for himself whether he can continue to fulfill his duties credibly under these circumstances,” Ms. Wieczorek-Zeul said, according to Bloomberg.

These comments reflected a sense among many bank officials that the world’s finance ministers would be unlikely to force him out, but that a reprimand of some kind might persuade him that his leadership was untenable. On the other hand, Mr. Wolfowitz has churned through meetings this weekend like a man with a mission.

Mr. Wolfowitz met Friday with the African members of the bank’s board of governors, an aide said, adding that as bank president he has met virtually every day with at least someone involved in African development.

Mr. Wolfowitz was instrumental in pushing for a huge debt cancellation plan for poor countries, most of them in Africa, announced by President Bush, Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain and other Western leaders at a 2005 summit meeting in Gleneagles, Scotland, attended by the singer Bono and other celebrities.

Although he has also imposed temporary aid cutoffs to Africa on grounds of corruption, angering European aid officials who felt they were not consulted, he has also won friends among many African countries for preaching accountability in government.

At a meeting on Thursday at which he was booed by bank employees, Mr. Wolfowitz appealed to the hostile crowd to work with him on the bank’s real priorities, singling out Africa.

A few weeks ago, Mr. Wolfowitz held a “town hall” session in the bank’s atrium wearing a shirt he had obtained on the most recent of his four trips to Africa as bank president. A slogan on the shirt read, in French, “No to impunity for violence against women, yes to justice.”

The session was to introduce a new vice president for Africa, Oby Ezekwesili, a former minister in Nigeria, who praised Mr. Wolfowitz and drew applause from the crowd.


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/15/washington/15bank.html
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Re: Turmoil Grows for Wolfowitz at World Bank

<font size="5"><center>Wolfowitz Backed Friend for Iraq Contract in ’03 </font size></center>

New York Times
By THOM SHANKER and STEVEN R. WEISMAN
Published: April 20, 2007

WASHINGTON, April 19 — Paul D. Wolfowitz, while serving as deputy secretary of defense, personally recommended that his companion, Shaha Ali Riza, be awarded a contract for travel to Iraq in 2003 to advise on setting up a new government, says a previously undisclosed inquiry by the Pentagon’s inspector general.

The inquiry, as described by a senior Pentagon official, concluded that there was no wrongdoing in Mr. Wolfowitz’s role in the hiring of Ms. Riza by the Science Applications International Corporation, a Pentagon contractor, because Ms. Riza had the expertise required to advise on the role of women in Islamic countries.

The investigators also found that Mr. Wolfowitz, now president of the World Bank, had not exerted improper influence in Ms. Riza’s hiring. Earlier this week, Science Applications International said an unnamed Defense Department official had directed that she be hired. She had been a World Bank employee for five years at the time.

Mr. Wolfowitz’s office said it could not comment on the latest disclosure. Ms. Riza’s lawyer, Victoria Toensing, did not respond to a request for a comment.

The disclosure of Mr. Wolfowitz’s role in Ms. Riza’s contract in 2003 provides a new indication of his involvement in her employment, at a time when the World Bank’s board is investigating his role in arranging for a large salary increase, a promotion and a transfer for Ms. Riza when he came to the bank in 2005.

The disclosure also came on a day of swirling pressure at the bank, where the 24-member executive board met into the evening to discuss the situation amid mounting calls for Mr. Wolfowitz’s resignation.

Bank officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they were divulging proceedings that were not supposed to be made public, reported that the rift between employees and the president had become a major distraction from their work, with some employees wearing blue ribbons in a display of defiance against his leadership.

“People feel paralyzed,” one official said. “No one is doing any work at all. This genie can never go back to the bottle.”

As the board met, officials said a separate review was being conducted by the vice presidents, who oversee specific countries, regions and subject matters, and who were polling their staffs. The overwhelming sentiment, officials said, was that Mr. Wolfowitz should step down.

In another sign of crumbling support, bank officials and others said that a consensus had emerged among European officials involved with the bank that Mr. Wolfowitz had lost his ability to lead the institution, not so much because of the issue of Ms. Riza but because of other policy disputes over the last two years.

The meeting of the board was called by the panel’s most senior member, Eckhardt Deutscher, of Germany. There was no sign of what the board would do, but Mr. Deutscher gave a speech on Thursday to a German foundation offering a strong though oblique criticism of Mr. Wolfowitz.

“The World Bank needs a strong leadership with compassion, integrity and vision,” Mr. Deutscher said in the speech, to the Friedrich Naumann Foundation. “The governance structures need a fundamental reform. And lastly, the World Bank needs credibility, credibility, credibility.”

Bank officials said Mr. Deutscher, who has worked closely with Mr. Wolfowitz on developing the bank’s anticorruption policies, now favors having him step down, a consensus already reached by Britain, France, the Netherlands and the Nordic countries.

A senior European official involved in the bank said Mr. Deutscher was “leading the charge” for a change in leadership and trying to assert the board’s role, effectively wresting control from Mr. Wolfowitz.

“For the moment, the view among the Europeans is, ‘Let’s continue the discussions, and it is up to the dean to express what the concern is,’ ” this official said, speaking about Mr. Deutscher. “It is in everybody’s interest to avoid bringing this to a head.”

On the matter of the contract for Ms. Riza in 2003, the Pentagon inspector general’s office opened a review in March 2005, two years after the invasion of Iraq and one year after it began a sweeping investigation into contracting practices during the early chaotic months of the war.

The Pentagon official who disclosed details of the inquiry agreed to answer questions on the condition of anonymity because it involved the role of senior officials in recommending individuals.

The official said the relatively small contract came under scrutiny only when a Pentagon investigator noticed Ms. Riza’s name and recalled that she was romantically linked to Mr. Wolfowitz.

The investigator deemed the matter was worth opening an inquiry, because the type of contract called specifically for it to be assigned to Ms. Riza. But a more formal investigation was not instigated, he said, because “it was determined that Ms. Riza was uniquely qualified to fill the contract requirements.”

Investigators also determined that “the recommendation of individuals does not constitute any misuse of office,” the official said in describing the findings of the inspector general. “Nobody violated or misused their office.” Nevertheless, the inquiry found that Ms. Riza “was recommended by Wolfowitz as well as others, in verbal form,” the official said.

It was not clear how Mr. Wolfowitz’s verbal recommendation was relayed through the Pentagon hierarchy and nascent occupation authority and then to the contractor, which is known as SAIC.

Earlier this week, a spokeswoman for SAIC said the company was told to contract with Ms. Riza by an official in the office of the under secretary of defense for policy, then headed by Douglas J. Feith.

But on Thursday, Pentagon officials, clarifying the source of the contract, said it was managed through the Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance, then headed by Jay Garner, a retired Army three-star general. General Garner said in an interview that he did not remember Ms. Riza’s playing any role in advising the American-led occupation.

The World Bank board is also examining the contract to see if it complied with bank rules requiring employees to get permission for outside consulting work when it might conflict with their duties at the bank. At the time of the contract, it was against bank policy to have dealings with Iraq, on the ground that it was a country under foreign military occupation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/20/washington/20wolfowitz.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
 
Top