Banking on Nothing

Just when you thought President George W. Bush’s other appointments were bad, Bush had to outdo himself by nominating Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz as president of the World Bank. Ironically, at the press conference announcing Wolfowitz’s nomination, Bush seemed to make it overwhelmingly clear that Wolfowitz is not qualified for the post. Let’s take a look at the President’s remarks.

“He’s a man of good experiences.” Last time I checked most people didn’t think Iraq was a very good experience. Let’s not forget what Wolfowitz told Congress and the American people: that Saddam has weapons of mass destruction (false), that we would be greeted as liberators (correct for a week), that we needed fewer troops than we did in Iraq (false), and that fewer troops died in Iraq than actually did (maybe he should take QR 34: “Counting People”). What a resume!

“He helped manage a large organization. The World Bank is a large organization; the Pentagon is a large organization—he’s been involved in the management of that organization.” Wonderful! Anyone who can manage a large organization can run the World Bank! Why don’t we nominate the head janitor at the Pentagon or Kenneth Lay instead?

“He’s a skilled diplomat, worked at the State Department in high positions.” Wow, finally Bush is right. If, by diplomacy, you mean war.

“Paul is committed to development.” Great! You mean you actually considered picking someone who hates poor countries to be the head of the World Bank?

“He’s a compassionate, decent man who will do a fine job in the World Bank.” This one is the kicker. When it is abundantly clear you have nominated someone to be the head of a development bank who has little to no experience in, say, economics, you just point out that he’s a nice guy and trust that everything will be okay. Because—let’s face it—nobody likes an expert who actually knows something about what he’s doing but who might not be so nice. The headlines should have read: “Newsflash—the only qualification for a job in Washington is being a ‘decent’ guy.”

Finally, Bush pointed out that his explanations should convince international leaders that Wolfowitz is just the man for the job. Has he even looked across the aisle or the pond? Europeans and Democrats alike hate Wolfowitz more than they hate Bush (and that’s saying something). Last time he went to Iraq (a developing country now if there ever was one), there was an assassination attempt. Wolfowitz’s nomination just shows how out of touch Bush is with the rest of the world.

To be fair, Wolfowitz is not stupid. He holds a Ph.D. in Political Science and was dean and professor of international relations at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies of Johns Hopkins University. Also, he has dealt with other countries before. As Bush pointed out, “he was Ambassador to Indonesia,” so it’s not like he has never seen a developing country before.

Nevertheless, Wolfowitz is a terrible choice. His expertise is not in development economics and he has shown a general knack for perturbing other countries, a skill that can only hurt the World Bank’s mission. The only thing going for him is that he is a loyal Bush supporter, which, of course, is just the thing we need in an international NGO.

But enough bashing Wolfowitz. If the Bush administration can’t find a better justification for Wolfowitz’s nomination, I’ll give them one: he majored in Math at Cornell and has a graduate degree in political science. Economics is kind of, sort of (not really) but marginally like political science with math, right? With all this to his credit, he’s practically overqualified for the position. Maybe his skills would be better used somewhere else.

Adam M. Guren ’08 is a Crimson editorial editor in Wigglesworth Hall.