It’s hard to believe that the Europeans could be so reactionary and, well, racist as to give importance to this new objection to the Wolfowitz nomination reported in the WaPo’s most recent carp festival – “Europeans Resist Wolfowitz for World Bank“:
Adding fuel to the controversy is concern within the bank staff over Wolfowitz’s reported romantic relationship with Shaha Riza, an Arab feminist who works as a communications adviser in the bank’s Middle East and North Africa department.
Both divorced, Wolfowitz and Riza have steadfastly declined to talk publicly about their relationship, but they have been regularly spotted at private functions and one source said the two have been dating for about two years. Riza, an Oxford-educated British citizen who was born in Tunisia and grew up in Saudi Arabia, shares Wolfowitz’s passion for democratizing the Middle East, according to people who know her.
You would think a Jewish and an Arab intellectual (both quite adult) being romantically involved would be applauded by “progressive” Europe, but I guess not. So what is the reason for their WDS — Wolfowitz Derangement Syndrome — other than the usual envy expressed by the ever-bilious British pol Clare Short who is quoted in the same article as saying on their TV: “America is going to do what it likes or hard cheese.”
Another article in the Financial Times reports that some Europeans and “development economists” were concerned that Wolfowitz was “ill-suited” for the post, apparently because he wasn’t properly educated in their specialty, as if development economics were particle physics or open-heart surgery. It’s hard to take that seriously, considering the deputy defense secretary is easily one of the brainiest government officials on either side of the pond.
So it must be his well-known role in the instigation of the Iraq War, but according to the latest poll, 61.5% of post-war Iraqis now feel their country is headed in the right direction as opposed to 23.2 thinking negatively, a stunning differential of nearly 40% which dwarfs any similar polls I have ever seen about America and Europe. The only conclusion we can draw from this is perhaps we should have invaded Europe. It would have cheered them up.
In sum, what is the cause of this Wolfowitz Derangement Syndrome that is creating such a brouhaha in Europe? Well, let’s hope it’s not a fear that Wolfowitz, as World Bank president, might want to make all aid dealings of the bank transparent. That wouldn’t reflect well on our European friends, would it?
UPDATE: But not to worry. As Soccerdad reports, Europe’s own anti-fraud organization OLAF says “that it found no conclusive evidence that European aid was used to fund terror.”
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
69 Comments
1. Michael J. Totten:Roger: You would think a Jewish and an Arab intellectual (both quite adult) being romantically involved would be applauded by “progressive” Europe, but I guess not.
Actually, I wouldn’t think that. How many Christian or post-Christian Europeans have romantic relationships with Arabs or Jews? Sometimes I wonder if continental European languages even have a word for “segregation.” If so, does it ever come up in politics as something that ought to be changed?
Mar 18, 2005 - 1:12 am 2. someone:Perhaps it’s because he might, horror of horrors, toss aside some of the “throw money at the problem” mentality that’s reigned internationally for decades.
Mar 18, 2005 - 2:14 am 3. thibaud:It’s a good thing that Wolfowitz is not an economist, let alone a development economist. The fact is that the World Bank and the IMF get the third-rank economists (nobellist Joseph Stiglitz’s words) who can’t cut it on Wall Street or in academe, and these pseudo-experts have done at least as much harm as good. Stiglitz is scathing on the stupidities of IMF economists (and Clinton Treasury officials, incl Larry Summers) for their overly contractionary policies during the 1997-1998 Asian Contagion, as well as for the colossal failure that was Russia’s “piratization” during the mid-1990s: http://www.tnr.com/041700/stiglitz041700.html
“It’s not fair to say that IMF economists don’t care about the citizens of developing nations. But the older men who staff the fund–and they are overwhelmingly older men–act as if they are shouldering Rudyard Kipling’s white man’s burden. IMF experts believe they are brighter, more educated, and less politically motivated than the economists in the countries they visit.
In fact, the economic leaders from those countries are pretty good–in many cases brighter or better-educated than the IMF staff, which frequently consists of third-rank students from first-rate universities. (Trust me: I’ve taught at Oxford University, MIT, Stanford University, Yale University, and Princeton University, and the IMF almost never succeeded in recruiting any of the best students.) Last summer, I gave a seminar in China on competition policy in telecommunications. At least three Chinese economists in the audience asked questions as sophisticated as the best minds in the West would have asked.
Remember, these are the words of a nobel-winning economist who was the chief economist at the World Bank! His main point is that the economists lacked any real grasp of the political and social dimensions of the crisis they sought to ameliorate. This is precisely what Wolfowitz, an expert in SE Asia and former ambassador to Indonesia, brings to the table!
Also note that it’s the Europeans, really the French, who appoint the IMF head and dominate its approach. If the IMF is full of incompetents, then how much better are the World Bank’s experts? Shouldn’t lack of economics credentials be a requirement for anyone trying to lead the World Bank toward effectiveness and relevance?
Mar 18, 2005 - 4:09 am 4. thibaud:Here’s the liberal Carnegie Foundation’s assessment of the World Bank’s record in the developing country I’m most familiar with, Russia. In a word, the record sucks. Once again, the development “experts” failed to grasp the political, social and legal context for their policies and ended up doing more harm than good.
Despite the Bank’s efforts to take credit for Russian privatization– which was in any case largely botched, resulting in transferring ca. 40% of Russian production into the hands of seven bandit groups– there is little positive to speak of concerning its Russia record. Here’s Carnegie: http://www.carnegieendowment.org/events/index.cfm?fa=eventDetail&id=516
Despite the Bank’s significant investment in Russia, Mr. Zanini characterized its work at the project level as poor, noting that, with the exception of sustainability, Russia’s project performance was well below that of other evaluated projects. Of the 15 evaluated projects, 7 were rated as satisfactory, while only 28 percent of the Bank’s Russia commitments received satisfactory ratings. Excluding the two groups of 1997 adjustment loans for which the Bank disputes the OED’s unsatisfactory rating, the percentage of satisfactory commitments remained low, at roughly 57 percent. A satisfactory rating depended on relevance, efficacy, and efficiency….
Zanini agreed that the World Bank pushed too much money at the wrong time in Russia, especially in 1996 and 1997 with the external and internal pressure on the Bank to lend. The Bank could have achieved all that it ultimately did achieve with much less money, by funneling that money instead into technical advice.
Yes, yes, we need more development economists at the World Bank. And more French influence of the sort that gave the IMF Michel Camdessus. Idiots.
Mar 18, 2005 - 4:17 am 5. thibaud:More of the anti-Wolfowitz crowd’s logic:
1) Wolfowitz is not qualified because he is concerned about human rights, which could “complicate relations with China.” Interesting that China’s singled out here, as opposed to Zimbabwe, say, or Sudan. God forbid that the World Bank should in any way interfere with the emerging EU-China bund.
2) Wolfowitz is not qualified because his consort is a World Bank official, a Saudi feminist in favor of human rights and democratizing the arab world. Huh?
This whole episode is descending into absurdity. What times we live in.
Mar 18, 2005 - 4:30 am 6. nickpicker:FWIW, German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer’s girl-friend is a 28-yr old Iranian. Note the age. Note the nationality. Conflict of interest? Certainly not. But note the double standard.
Mar 18, 2005 - 4:49 am 7. thibaud:That wouldn’t be Joschka the Pimp, would it? http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,343108,00.html
Mar 18, 2005 - 5:05 am 8. TedM:One has to recognize GWB’s droll sense of humor. The Wolfowitz move is like pulling the wings off a butterfly. The morosely paranoid LLL’s are driven deeper into insanity.
Mar 18, 2005 - 5:31 am 9. mrsizer:Again! You forgot the word “again”:
he only conclusion we can draw from this is perhaps we should have invaded Europe again. It would have cheered them up again.
And the 60th anniversary just passed. Oh well, perhaps on the 75th.
Mar 18, 2005 - 5:34 am 10. Jim in Texas:So, Can we get more ATMs locations now?
Mar 18, 2005 - 5:39 am 11. fdcol63:European opposition to Wolfowitz can be summed up in ONE word:
ANTI-SEMITISM
Pure and simple.
Mar 18, 2005 - 5:45 am 12. Peter G.:John Kerry has already stated he’s opposed to the Wolfowitz nomination. What better endorsement could one get than that?
Mar 18, 2005 - 5:53 am 13. Patrick Tyson:And so it goes…
http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/18/news/newsmakers/bono_wolfowitz.reut/
Mar 18, 2005 - 6:32 am 14. erp:fdcol63 is only partially right.
Anti-Semitism and the fear that Mr. Wolfowitz will open the windows and let fresh air and sunshine in. I can’t wait to watch hideous things crawl out from under their hiding places and run for cover. This is going to be fun.
About his personal life??? Weren’t we taught that as long as a public servant’s personal life doesn’t interfere with doing his job, the public has no right to judge.
Has that rule been changed?
Mar 18, 2005 - 6:41 am 15. gk:Why is it that whenever I hear Sen.Kerry give forth an opinion I think “dumbass!” ? This is all I need to know about the efficacy of appointing Wolfowitz to head the World Bank. All the right people are falling over themselves to rant and rave.
Mar 18, 2005 - 6:46 am 16. richard mcenroe:Someone ó No, worse, he might put a stop to the Eurododge of waving yours hands as though you’re throwing money at a problem, when you’re really pocketing. The people who gave us OFF, the Credit Lyonnais scandal and arms shows in Iran are going to give us financial advice?
As for the affair… an Arab Feminist? What, does she wear a transparent veil? But the response is in the best Eurotradition: “Sacre bleu! He wants our money and our women! Le juif insatiable!“
Mar 18, 2005 - 6:49 am 17. yama-arashi:The “old Europe” American press fails to consider an important point: who cares what France/Germany think. Or conversely, how many countries are quite happy with the appointment. Countries with real economic, (increasingly) military, and moral authority. Bush’s great legacy will be sowing the seeds for democracy in the Middle East, but his greatest legacy will be, in my humble opinion, re-ordering institutions like the U.N. (Bolton) and the World Bank (Wolfowitz) so that they reflect the real balance of power in the world (and holding them to account) and deepening alliances with countries that are relevant (India, Japan). Actually, given all that is at stake, the response to Wolfowitz (Bolton) has been rather mute. Old Europe and their activists around the world have no juice left.
Mar 18, 2005 - 8:14 am 18. thibaud:Has any of our fearless MSM correspondents thought to interview any of the developing country officials who actually know Wolfowitz and his work? I mean, the man was US undersecretary of State for SE Asia and Ambassador to Indonesia…
Mar 18, 2005 - 8:25 am 19. Canucklehead:I see the Wolfowitz Derangement Syndrome as a predictable outcome of a European neo-luddite strategy to tye down the US by lilli-putin means. Everything about this speaks defensive tactics by the old-EUropeans who are trying to remain relevant. Their approach is mildly obstructionist in the hopes that a diplomatic carrot would be offered them as the result of their neo-luddite shakedown.
I see the diplomatic carrot being Wolfowitz’s series of conversations with Bono. The neo-luddites have been outflanked by President Bush’s team and in no position to do anything but provide biting commentary on the new decision-makers. The more the old-EUropeans harp, the more the Wolfowitz-Bono(insert celebrity here) axis calls the tune. I expect there are many Bono’s out there who would be willing to dance with Wolfowitz.
Mar 18, 2005 - 8:33 am 20. PJ:This W-related derangement syndrome is like the flu: if you don’t really take care of yourself, it comes back with a vengeance. Now that the bombs in Iraq are dying down, they have to find something else about W to hate.
I hope the public can see the incredible pretzel logic of the media, looking for negative spin on anything American or Republican.
Chrenkoff has a funny post on the Wolfowitz appointment and the ensuing vapors over at the Guardian:
http://chrenkoff.blogspot.com/
Mar 18, 2005 - 8:56 am 21. Anne Haight:It’s really fascinating to see the “Jew dating an Arab” tossed into the litany of criticisms that Europeans have against Wolfowitz. To most Americans that looks like a total non-sequitur. We think, “They’re not married to other people. She doesn’t work for him and they’re both adults. Who gives a shit?”
Mar 18, 2005 - 9:36 am 22. Sous-commandant Marco:Mr simon, you’re saying:
“You would think a Jewish and an Arab intellectual (both quite adult) being romantically involved would be applauded by “progressive” Europe, but I guess not. ”
This is a blatant and vicious deformation of what the WP article is saying. The article is saying that “some staffers” of the World Bank (not progressive Europe) find abnormal that the chief executive of the Bank would be romantically involved with somebody working at the Bank. This would be evident, even for you, if you had actually taken the time to read the paragraph just after the ones that you are quoting, which starts with “Bank policy allows spouses…”. But maybe you did read this paragraph and still chose to ignore it, for the sake of making Europeans look bad?
Second, one of the main reasons why Europeans are criticizing the choice of Wolfovitz is given in the second paragraph, which you obviously also failed to read (or chose to ignore once again). It says: “… European capitals, where critics fumed that Washington had failed to consult other member countries of the bank before springing its choice on them. ” Farther in the article, a Briton (not French or German) is quoted as saying: “America is going to do what it likes or hard cheese.” Clearly, in addition to Mr Wolfowitz being incompetent for the job (as shown by his destruction of Iraq), Bush is abusing his power in order to reward one of his servants.
Why do I always have the impression that Bushies, chickenhawks and neo-cons just can’t read their own language anymore? Because it is true.
Mar 18, 2005 - 9:44 am 23. Carol_Herman:I agree that Europee-ins are deranged. But the angrier they get, the wilder they scream, why would that make them frightening? That you can’t deal with lunatics? I agree. But we don’t have to take orders from them, either. Sometimes, watching freaks getting in a sweat with their anti-Semitism, allows saner people to to stand back, while disease destroys them those that got it. I think I’m saying they’re also impotent.
Mar 18, 2005 - 9:48 am 24. thibaud:“Wolfovitz” – LOL. Note how the anti-semites always give themselves away by judaicizing to the max Wolfowitz’s surname.
Gruppenfuehrer Marco, do you not find it strange that none of your fellow travelers raised any concerns about Bono and Carly Fiorina, those supremely qualified shortlist candidates to head the Bank?
Or that none of them seems overly concerned about UN officials sexually harassing other UN employees, or raping children in the regions they’re entrusted with overseeing?
Mar 18, 2005 - 9:54 am 25. JK Ribera:The very passionate Sous-commandant Marco who comments above perhaps has not noticed that the Wolfowitz for World Bank nomination has been floated for months now, one would assume by the administration. If we in the public know this, we can also assume the Europeans did as well. It’s been all over the newspaper. Certainly no surprise at all.
Mar 18, 2005 - 9:55 am 26. yama-arashi:“…a Briton (not French or German) is quoted as saying: “America is going to do what it likes or hard cheese.”
Clare Short? A representative of the U.K.? And Kucinich represents mainstream America. And I’ve got a bridge to sell ya in Brooklyn. C’mon, we all know what she is all about, and it is funny that you don’t mention who this representative Brit is.
“Why do I always have the impression that Bushies, chickenhawks and neo-cons just can’t read their own language anymore? Because it is true.” I can read you under the table in three languages, and I’m one of the stupider ones here.
Mar 18, 2005 - 10:12 am 27. illison:Wow, way to play the race card in your first hand, Mr. Simon. Did you even read the article? It clearly says that the concern is about the potential conflict of interest where the bank’s chief executive has a romantic relationship with one of its employees. Been hanging out with Johnny Cochran lately?
Mar 18, 2005 - 10:13 am 28. Old Dad:I think the outbreak of WDS is symptomatic of a larger derangement, which makes me wonder to what extent the left is truly crazy.
I suspect the percentage of lefty lunatics probably has not changed much. Certainly some are loons, but more are simply bitter cynics, or failed ideologues. I suspect most are just dissillusioned and pissed off.
Why then such widespread public idiocy? Why the internet of course. The news cycle has compressed and newsmakers, and news writers are under much more pressure to respond to the events of the day, and so they frequently say stupid things. Gone are the days when pundits had a few days or even weeks to form an opinion. Moreover, the idiotic pronouncements are now immediately published at the speed of light. Time was that a stupid statement might be carefully managed. Damage control was possible. Not any more. Utter something stupid, and we can all know about it in just a few clicks.
Will this immediacy have a “chilling” effect on free speech. Not at all. With luck, though, it might cut down on rampant stupidity in print.
Mar 18, 2005 - 10:15 am 29. Dave:The fact that Wolfowitz’ appointment surprised anyone is due to the fact that no one has been paying attention to what Bush has been saying for years now. He signaled his intent to reform the World Bank back in 1999, as well as laying out the philosphical vision for the pro-democracy revolution. I have posted a long excerpt from his ‘99 Simi Valley speech at Technically Speaking, but here is the relevant quote on the World Bank:
“There must also be reform of international financial institutions – the World Bank and the IMF. They can be a source of stability in economic crisis. But they should not impose austerity, bailing out bankers while impoverishing a middle class. They should not prop up failed and corrupt financial systems. These organizations should encourage the basics of economic growth and free markets. Spreading the rule of law and wise budget practices. Promoting sound banking laws and accounting rules. Most of all, these institutions must be more transparent and more accountable.”
Mar 18, 2005 - 10:47 am 30. charlotte:illison: “It clearly says that the concern is about the potential conflict of interest where the bank’s chief executive has a romantic relationship with one of its employees.”
What? Wolfowitz has a grown-up respectable girlfriend who works at the World Bank? That’s just so wrong. Once he’s the WB Chief Executive, he should find himself a nice, young intern with whom to dally, non-romantically, of course. The Europeans are much more understanding of that kind of American behavior.
Mar 18, 2005 - 10:54 am 31. Terrye:I live in rural Indiana and work for a home health care agnecy and if I knew that Bush wanted to reform the World Bank and was considering naming Wolfowitz then one has to wonder just what the Europeans have been doing?
Other than taking bribes and illegally selling arms and looking the other way while UN officials rape young children that it.
This uproar is about the “Zionist” running the world bank and actually demanding results, all this stuff about his relationship is a joke, and an excuse. Like the Europeans would give a damn anyway.
Mar 18, 2005 - 11:09 am 32. Canucklehead:Sous-commandant Marco, you need to keep everything in context. Your point of view has been around for many a day. Please read this [url]http://www.themodernword.com/pynchon/pynchon_essays_luddite.html[/url]
The premise of that article is the 1959 C. P. Snow’s famous Rede lecture, “The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution,” notable for its warning that intellectual life in the West was becoming polarized into “literary” and “scientific” factions, each doomed not to understand or appreciate the other.
The bottom line is – Is it O.K. to be a Luddite?
Go read the article and update it to today’s context.
You are a neo-luddite. Take no offense. You truly believe in Bushitler (Frankenstein).
Mar 18, 2005 - 11:25 am 33. Canucklehead:The working link for the above comment is -
http://www.themodernword.com/pynchon/pynchon_essays_luddite.html
Mar 18, 2005 - 11:27 am 34. someone:Well, that was enlightening.
Mar 18, 2005 - 11:47 am 35. illison:charlotte,
So do you agree with Roger that the basis for the questioning of the propriety of the boss-underling relationship is actually racism? That’s really the only thing I was talking about. Your allusion to Clinton is an utter non-sequitur, standard fare from rightists with no leg upon which to stand.
Mar 18, 2005 - 11:49 am 36. WichitaBoy:Good Morning Ms. Short! This is your wakeup call!
In the real world when you thoroughly disarm yourself you become irrelevant.
Mar 18, 2005 - 11:52 am 37. JK Ribera:illison, if I am not mistaken, the Washinton Post article goes on and on about Wolfowitz’s woman friend’s ethnic background. In our politically correct world, such information is usually omitted as irrelevant. Why not here?
Mar 18, 2005 - 11:54 am 38. Terrye:illison:
I don’t know about charlotte, but I think one would have to be naive to believe these folks would care who Wolfowitz was having dinner with if he was let us say a Presbyterian with a Democratic administration.
Mar 18, 2005 - 11:55 am 39. AlanC:All right all you folks getting your knickers in a twist because of this “conflict of interest”, why don’t you wait until he is actually appointed and see if maybe his girl friend resigns to work in some think tank.
Mar 18, 2005 - 11:59 am 40. Dave:The link for the 1999 Bush speech extract cited above didn’t work and should be
Technically Speaking
Mar 18, 2005 - 12:03 pm 41. wmag103:I find some of these comments disturbing. The notion that “the Europeans” would not like Wolfowitz to be the president of the WB because he is jewish is ludicrous. There isn’t some sort of vast european anti-semitic conspiracy and I’m always amused when North Americans use anti-semitism as a stick with which to beat Europeans.
Wolfowitz’s relationship with his girlfriend also has nothing to do with it. I didn’t even know about it until people started talking about it and I doubt anyone really cares.
The final point of the original piece here, that the Europeans wouldn’t want Wolfowitz to “make all aid dealings of the bank transparent. That wouldn’t reflect well on our European friends, would it?” is somewhat strange given two facts. First, four European governments have a better “development effectiveness score” than the US, as measured by the Center for Global Development, which is an American institution, and another 3 are tied with the US. Second, the US gives a pitifully small share of GNI in AID, so it is somewhat strange for an american to be lecturing Europeans, who are the most generous givers.
I know that many people in the WB are very upset by Wolfowitz’s appointment, many of them American, or at least non european. The real issue among Europeans is the man’s record.
Finally, it appears that many people posting here view the WB as American property. The EU nations together actually own more than 27% of the shares of the World Bank, compared to the US’ 16%, so it is actually ours.
Mar 18, 2005 - 12:05 pm 42. charlotte:The EU nations together actually own more than 27% of the shares of the World Bank, compared to the US’ 16%, so it is actually ours.
wmag103, perhaps the EU nations would like to share one seat on the UNSC, then. As long as we’re lumping them together, that is.
Which ONE, sovereign European nation gives as much as the US?
Mar 18, 2005 - 12:20 pm 43. vegetius:wmag103:
What was so sterling about the ‘records’ of other WB presidents before they assumed office?? As far as I know they have been non-entities and mediocrities. As a test, off the top of your head, can you name the last three presidents of the WB. Unless you work at the WB. I’m betting you can’t and I’ll bet your average Euro can’t either. So, why all the fuss??? Why are all of those Versace knickers in a twist?
Mar 18, 2005 - 12:23 pm 44. thibaud:Nice try, wmag, but Japan alone provides about 25% of the Bank’s budget. Which is only fitting, given that they’re now strongly supported by Bush in their bid for a UN Security Council seat
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46196-2005Mar18.html
When will Europe merge its three UNSC seats into one?
Mar 18, 2005 - 12:23 pm 45. thibaud:Also, wmag, please do read up on the World Bank’s (and the IMF’s) miserable record and ask yourself why you’re still disagreeing with Joseph Stiglitz as the competence of those third-rate economists, in Stiglitz’s words, who you think deserve to run those institutions.
Mar 18, 2005 - 12:26 pm 46. yama-arashi:wmag103,
If you want to start tallying up percents…. After the U.S.comes Japan. Who do you think Japan is backing? What strikes me is your confidence that much of the world doesn’t see Europe as the problem, by which I mostly mean the French/UN/World Bank way of doing business and administering aid, and all your talk about percents of this or that belies the main point, you guys ain’t got the juice anymore, politically, economically, militarily. The world is becoming multilateral, as I keep hearing that it should, and what this means is the world really could care less what France and Germany and their allies for this fifteen minutes or the next fifteen minutes are thinking. Those funding the kleptocracy have had enough. Game, set, and Match. The echo-chamber continues though, and I trust you’ll enjoy its last beats, but soon you’ll discover no one is even listening or bothering to feed the rhetorical beast. History doesn’t end, but it just zoomed by your guys. A few hundred years too late, but better late than never.
Mar 18, 2005 - 12:29 pm 47. heather:yama-arashi: you have, in one short comment, summed up Europe’s position in today’s world:
“you guys ain’t got the juice anymore, politically, economically, militarily.”
excellent. In fact, in the USA itself, the east coast is still very powerful (ie, the financial centres in New York), but the nation’s wealth and power is increasingly found on the west coast. Just take a look at downtown LA – the huge numbers of banks alone is awesome.
And then, there is Japan (who knew that the World Bank gets 25% of its money from Japan???) and India and Singapore, and – increasingly – Australia.
My mother (born 1912) once said that during the first half of her life, the British Empire was the foremost Power of the World. And then, it simply disappeared as a factor in world politics.
Today, we are witnessing huge changes, ones that will define the next 50 years of world history. I think this is interesting and wonderful!!!
Mar 18, 2005 - 12:57 pm 48. Rick Ballard:“History doesn’t end, but it just zoomed by your guys.”
Strauss 1
Kojeve 0
Mar 18, 2005 - 1:05 pm 49. wmag103:charlotte, as a share of GNI, all the major european countries give more than the US. The US gives £9bn, the UK for example gives about £4bn, with a firm commitment to make that £7bn. Norway gives more almost 1% of GNI, compared to America’s pitiful 0.2%, approx.
I never actually said I didn’t want Wolfowitz to run the bank, or gave any opinion on the issue, i was talking about most people’s jingoistic attitude to the EU. When the EU finally becomes a state in its own right (and unfortunately it will happen) it will have a larger income than the US. If Chirac ever gets his way, the US will have a real opponent.
I can’t but laugh as one of you suggest history has zoomed europe by. Sure it has zoomed some countries by, some countries continue to punch above their weight though, but the most amusing thing about your view is that you haven’t realised that China, India and Brazil will have left the US behind by the end of this century.
Mar 18, 2005 - 1:19 pm 50. wmag103:“Nice try, wmag, but Japan alone provides about 25% of the Bank’s budget. Which is only fitting, given that they’re now strongly supported by Bush in their bid for a UN Security Council seat
Link…
When will Europe merge its three UNSC seats into one?”
never, not unless the US and China give up theirs
Mar 18, 2005 - 1:23 pm 51. Terrye:wmag:
Talk percentages all you want, but considering the size of the US GDP those comparisons are absurd.
The Unites States and Japan are and have been the largest source of funding for multi national organizations with the British coming in after.
Wolfowitz is a brilliant man with a long distnguished history. Europe is unhappy about the Iraq War, but then again if Europe had its way Saddam would still be in power staling money from his own popualtion with the help of the UN.
I think we need to shake up some of these instituttions and make them accountable and more efficient. Otherwise, what is the point in funding them?
And of course the Europeans are anti semitic.
Mar 18, 2005 - 1:33 pm 52. yama-arashi:I’m fairly certain the World Bank doesn’t get 25 percent of its money from Japan. But I am also certain the U.S. and Japan are the number one and two contributors to the World Bank, the U.N., etc… When people like wmag start talking about percents of this and that, and clean bills of health given by this think tank and that think tank, why even argue, their way of arguing proves the point much better than we can make it. But if we must argue I want to be on Heather’s and her mother’s side.
I don’t know about this Strauss guy, Rick, unless you are talking about the composer, but I did read something by Kojeve a number of years ago. He struck me as one of those rare people incapable of being measured. Especially by a simpleton like me. This Strauss, if they are friends, as they surely would be, could also be one of these immeasurable kind of existences. As such, I doubt they are keeping score. Which isn’t to suggest we shouldn’t
Mar 18, 2005 - 1:35 pm 53. Terrye:I think that India should replace France.
And what about Brazil…. they have a huge population.
Mar 18, 2005 - 1:36 pm 54. Old Dad:Two more cents:
This appointment is not very important. My guess is that Mr. Wolfowitz wanted it for personal and not professional reasons. The fact that it has ticked off all the right people only suggests that it’s probably a very good move.
I’m not terribly interested in who gives more, whose is bigger type comparisons with the EU. They are meaningless. I like most of the Europeans I know. In fact, my son is currently living in Switzerland, and he’s thriving but anxious to come home. I won’t be around to know if China has somehow passed us by in a hundred years. Hell, I don’t even know how you might measure that. But if my great grand kids are free and prospering in the good old USA, then that’s just fine by me. My bet is that China and Brazil will be one helluva lot more like the US in 100 years than the vice versa.
But I’m a jingo.
Mar 18, 2005 - 1:47 pm 55. Canucklehead:Wmag103, what should be said… Just you wait?
EU will surpass the US… Just you wait!!!
Norway gives more almost 1% of GNI, compared to America’s pitiful 0.2%… Just you wait!!!
When the EU finally becomes a state in its own right (and unfortunately it will happen) it will have a larger income than the US. If Chirac ever gets his way, the US will have a real opponent… Just you wait!!!
The basis for european influence peddling is the old aristocracy that never learns, and never disappears. As they don’t have anything to offer the world, all they can do is caution the world… just you wait…
Should the people in Iraq have waited? What about Lebanon? Syria? Iran? Georgia? Ukraine? Moldova? Does Old-Europe have any friends that listen to it?
Life is what you make of it. Judging by Old-Europe’s past and present actions, life has little value to it…
Things are rockin’. Nobody’s waiting…
Mar 18, 2005 - 1:48 pm 56. yama-arashi:wmag103,
First, thanks for putting your two cents into the pot.
Second, when you talk about shares of GNI and all the rest it proves my point. No Juice. See Terrye.
Third, how do you know what I “realize” about the geo-political situation at the end of this century. Did I say something about that? I’m waiting for the quote. No, I didn’t think so. Now you, unlike me, make a rather clear statement about the state of the world at the end of this century. To wit: China, India and Brazil!! I don’t have a crystal ball so I won’t embarrass myself with predictions. Instead a few questions. By China do you mean “China” like one says, say, Europe or the Middle East, or is China a country–the mythological middle kingdom? And as one who lives in Asia and speaks the languages etc…, you would be very silly to think Japan is not a part, or even the largest part, of the on-going picture. And India’s rises is America’s downfall? How does this work its way out. Brazil? Hmmmm.
Mar 18, 2005 - 1:54 pm 57. yama-arashi:rise. How does this work its way out?
Mar 18, 2005 - 1:57 pm 58. Rick Ballard:Yama,
Alexander Kojeve was one of the architects of the EU. A Hegelian/Marxist policitical philosopher who bears some responsibility for post modernism.
Leo Strauss was at the University of Chicago as a professor when many of the current neo-cons were taking degrees there. Also a political philosopher but from the classical Platonic school. Wolfowitz actually took his doctorate under the supervision of Wohlstetter, I believe, but he did take some classes with Strauss.
So, the appointment of Wolfowitz to the WB can be considered (to some extent) as a victory by Strauss over Kojeve. That may have more to do with the shudders in Europe than Wolfowitz being Jewish.
Francis Fukuyama (Straussian) actually picked The End of History as a title to his book at least partially as a rebuttal of the Hegelian Marxists (and Kojeve).
Mar 18, 2005 - 2:24 pm 59. yama-arashi:“And India’s rise is America’s downfall?” (There. Please excuse all other errors in grammar and thinking. I’m chewing gum while I’m typing and this causes all sorts of problems.)
Mar 18, 2005 - 2:24 pm 60. yama-arashi:Rick,
Ahhh. It’s all coming back to me. While at the UofC I did eavesdrop now and then in places above my station. Now, with my memory refreshed, I may disagree with a few of your statements, but this is neither the place, nor am I the person to make a fuss.
Mar 18, 2005 - 2:29 pm 61. yama-arashi:” I won’t be around to know if China has somehow passed us by in a hundred years. Hell, I don’t even know how you might measure that. But if my great grand kids are free and prospering in the good old USA, then that’s just fine by me. My bet is that China and Brazil will be one helluva lot more like the US in 100 years than the vice versa.” Well said! And we’ll still be eating French Fries and enjoying Renoir (you see wmag103, I like France).
Mar 18, 2005 - 2:38 pm 62. Terrye:I keep hearing about how competitive the US is, but it strikes me that Europeans are over concerned with the fate of America. All they talk about is who will overtake us…India or China..and that of course will tell them who to pander to.
And that is their problem, always has been. They are too concerned with screwing the other guy and not concerned enough with just getting the job done.
Mar 18, 2005 - 2:49 pm 63. Rick Ballard:Great Yama, now I get to wonder which parts I muddled. And you were a ChicagoBoy. OK – maybe classical Platonic school is inadequate, perhaps “rebuttal” is imprecise – or wrong (jist IMO anyway) but those are the only two I see that are open – and “few” means more than two. Where else did I screw up? If your first name turns out to be Francis, then I think I need to go lay down for awhile.
Mar 18, 2005 - 3:03 pm 64. yama-arashi:Rick,
They let me in by mistake, and I was merely eavesdropping. As well, my particular sense of humor and playfulness was/is not very useful, or understandable, I suppose. As far as wondering which parts were muddled, there is no greater joy, and I’d be remiss if I tried to save you the toil. Plus, what do I know? I doubt I’m less of a muddler than you, and evidence suggests much more.
Mar 18, 2005 - 3:22 pm 65. Deb D:I think Bush’s thinking in selecting Wolfowitz, once again shows his MBA at work. A good CEO sends the best people to the most troublesome spots to get them in working order so the company (country, world!) is more productive and contributes to the bottom line. How smart is Bush? — very! I say CEO’s of the USA — run for president in 2008 — your country needs you.
Mar 18, 2005 - 4:03 pm 66. AST:“So what is the reason for their WDS”
Too long in the echo chamber of the liberal elite. There IS a climate of hatred for all things Bush, and the myth of the Neo-cons is widely believed.
Wolfowitz is one of the true compassionate people in government, considering his moves to help the Marsh Arabs in Iraq and his support for protecting Iraqis from Saddam’s apes.
Those who spout this bile about him should be ashamed of their own cowardice. What have they done for human rights besides demonstrate?
I don’t know where we got this idea that marching and demonstrating qualified as “doing something.” If Ghandi had lived in Saddam’s Iraq, he’d never have been heard of. He’d have been killed brutally. Protests and demonstrations only work with societies who have a conscience to appeal to. That’s why we had a Civil War and why China had Tiananmen Square.
Mar 18, 2005 - 4:32 pm 67. Frederick:yama-arashi: “Now you, unlike me, make a rather clear statement about the state of the world at the end of this century. To wit: China, India and Brazil!! I don’t have a crystal ball so I won’t embarrass myself with predictions.”
A mortal wound, delivered indirectly. Subtle and elegant. I admire your style and enjoy your posts.
Mar 18, 2005 - 7:11 pm 68. Seeker:The nomination of Wolfowitz is generating reactions much like that of Karen Hughes. This prompted me to look once again at the Wolfowitz published record. When you look carefully at “Wolfowitz live” it looks good to me – like this Council on Foreign Relations seminar.
The FSO comments on Karen Hughes also do not look like what I read in the NYT. E.g., see John Burgess’s comments here.
Mar 18, 2005 - 7:44 pm 69. dorosy:The nomination of Wolfowitz is frightening the europeans as may the owners of dollar might take measures to compet as well as block the blossoming euro zones.
Mar 21, 2005 - 5:53 pm