If this is true, it may explain the extent of the opposition to Wolfie's tenure. There is far more at stake here than his personal corruption and cronyism, which are not exceptional in those echelons.
[WS:] Here is what that someone says on the subject:
"If my assumptions are true, this would be big because the contributors to IDA would be financing the other sectors while the US spends on the war. [...] W had stopped all lending to certain countries in Africa on the argument that until good governance and corruption is tackled no lending (ie Congo, Kenya) for a while. One has to investigate if those IDA funds where reallocated towards Irak lending program during that period to increase it (IDA allocation is pretty fixed but can be shuffle from one country to another (ie conflicts period).
You could throw the idea to your journalist friend to start investigating that aspect. He could contact IMF and WB staff who works on Irak and asked them what have been the yearly IDA allocation to Irak since the war started while investigating what happened in those "corrupted" countries during the same period.
Honestly the more I think about it the more it scares me. The Board of Directors may have been involved in that influenced by W and the Americans since 2003; hence how could they come out clear and loud on getting rid of him (they will all have to go).
There is a silence at the Bank right now from the top that is quite disturbing."
Doug?
Wojtek