Patrick Bond writes: > Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:34:57 +0300 > From: "Michael Keaney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > If Wolfensohn really is inflicting such "damage" on the World Bank, > should he not get some sort of PEN-L award in recognition? Nah. Since whatever excellent destruction of that institution's esprit de corps is accompanied by co-option of both Northern and some Southern NGOs and trade unions, and deepening the profoundly destructive relations the Bank enjoys with comprador finance ministers and other leaders in the South, the overall balance is net negative. ===== Hmmm. Pity. Whatever, supposedly treating the economists of the WB like they actually treat their victims is a nice thought. But the tenor of the public critique is that the bank is straying from the purity of the Anne Krueger/Larry Summers economics approach and that this is bad. Also, the criticisms of Wolfensohn could easily apply to a whole range of "strong leaders", designated so on the grounds of their "correct" policies. Incorrect policies are pushed by those with a personalised management style, apparently. The spectacle of his undermining is interesting for what it reveals about splits within the imperial state, and how these splits are playing out. Does this steady drip of criticism begin with the assumption of power by Dubya? Similar criticisms have recently been made of Horst Köhler, whose temper was supposedly "legendary" at the EBRD. Thanks to John Pilger, however, we now know something about Stanley Fischer's self-control and receptivity to new ideas. Michael K.
