The World Bank's board of executive directors "unanimously" confirmed the nomination of neocon hawk and deputy defense secretary Paul Wolfowitz to be president of the WB. while The Europeans were particularly outraged, given Wolfowitz's advocacy of US unilateralism and his lack of contrition for the debacle in Iraq. Development NGOs reacted with dismay at the nomination, and
92% of World Bank staff expressed a negative response.
meanwhile Krugman as usual has a different aspect.
after an opening paragraph;
You can say this about Paul Wolfowitz's qualifications to lead the World Bank: He has been closely associated with America's largest foreign aid and economic development project since the Marshall Plan. I'm talking, of course, about reconstruction in Iraq. Unfortunately, what happened there is likely to make countries distrust any economic advice Wolfowitz might give.
he pulls the talk to the ideologic arena and continues
Let's not focus on mismanagement. Instead, let's talk about ideology.
Before the Iraq war, Pentagon hawks shut the State Department out of planning. This excluded anyone with development experience. As a result, the administration went into Iraq determined to demonstrate the virtues of radical free-market economics, with nobody warning about the likely problems.
In fact, economic ideology may explain why U.S. officials didn't move quickly after the fall of Baghdad to hold elections -- even though assuring Iraqis that we didn't intend to install a puppet regime might have headed off the insurgency. Jay Garner, the first Iraq administrator, wanted elections as quickly as possible, but the White House wanted to put a "template" in place by privatizing oil and other industries before handing over control.
The oil fields never did get privatized. Nonetheless, the attempt to turn Iraq into a laissez-faire showpiece was, in its own way, as much an in-your-face rejection of world opinion as the decision to go to war. Dogmatic views about the universal superiority of free markets have been losing ground around the world.
... .
and lastly concludes
Where does Wolfowitz fit into all this? The advice that the World Bank gives is as important as the money it lends -- but only if governments take that advice. And given the ideological rigidity the Pentagon showed in Iraq, they probably won't. If Wolfowitz says that some free-market policy will help economic growth, he'll be greeted with as much skepticism as if he declared that some country has weapons of mass destruction.