As a former senior vice president and chief economist of the World Bank, Joseph Stiglitz, currently a Professor at Columbia University and 2001 Nobel Laureate in Economic Sciences shares his insight concerning the repercussion of Obama’s choice winning over Africa and Latin America’s choice with respect to the headship role at the World Bank. The U.S. has had uncontested undemocratic monopoly over this institution since the end of the World Wars. One would have thought it would have given way to a more multilateral system of appointment by now but I guess its not so easy to let up on the power that comes with such influence.
Prof. Stiglitz’s article is entitled: Developing countries deserve a greater say in World Bank governance.
The article asks, “In an election year America’s choice for World Bank may well prevail. But at what cost?”
Of course since that article, America got its way again leaving developing countries wondering about the selection criteria in a world where the chief promoter of democracy, multilateralism, meritocracy and transparency since WW2 has been America. Will America extend its democratic and meritocracy mantra to world financial government? Or is the world to believe that this is simply just a mantra used only when the hegemon wants its way in the global community of nations and not necessarily a principle upon which it leads? Tough questions which do not easily lend themselves to satisfactory answers!