I would rather reform the World Bank than destroy it. Where will the concessional loans for development come from if these institutions are destroyed? (I am not convinced by those who believe that development aid is the problem, as their target seems to be corruption but they still have no solution for actually addressing poverty alleviation).
Others on this list have mentioned using commercial loans from institutions that either have their own history of corruption and high rates (JBIC) or little experience with development policies (EIB) in the South. I am also skeptical of a reliance on "government - industry" partnerships for development that Wolfensohn is selling. Who will invest in the poorest and lowest rated sovereign countries? Rather than creating new multilateral institutions or leaving developing countries to rely on commercial markets, I would rather fix the multi-lateral institutions we have.
If you have a realistic solution for promoting development for 80% of the world's population without (at least) the current resources of the World Bank, I would be more than willing to hear it. As it stands the UNDP is predicting that the goal of halving the number of people living in absolute poverty by 2015 will fail without doubling aid from donor nations.
Best,
Vikash Yadav Philadelphia, PA
-----Original Message----- From: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com [mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com]On Behalf Of Doug Henwood Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:50 PM To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com Subject: RE: O'Neill: "WB has driven poor countries into a ditch"
Vikash Yadav wrote:
>Below is a very similar article by the New York Times on O'Neill's
>statement... It does appear that this "international compassionate
>conservatism" is really a devious plan to destroy the World Bank.
And that's bad?
Doug