May 30, 2007
What The Zoellick Pick Means
A Washington Post story this morning sums up the conundrum facing Robert Zoellick, whom President Bush nominated today to succeed Paul Wolfowitz as head of the World Bank:
"[T]he insider credentials that make Zoellick favored in the Bush White House, where loyalty carries enormous weight, could work against him at the bank as they did with his predecessor. Many European governments were dismayed by the appointment of Wolfowitz, who was a primary architect of the Iraq war while at the Pentagon."
Will the aspects of Wolfowitz that many at the World Bank had trouble swallowing when he was appointed -- and ultimately contributed to his downfall -- apply to Zoellick as well? And is the problem limited to the individuals chosen, or it really about the United States being the one to choose in the first place?
The tradition of an American leading the World Bank dates back to its inception in 1944, when it was founded to help countries rebuild after World War II. The United States gives the most money and holds the largest stake in the organization, which is headquartered in Washington, D.C. Although the World Bank's board of directors technically has the right to deny an appointment, Americans have always served the five-year terms of the presidency.
With the imbroglio surrounding Wolfowitz, however, there were some rumblings about the process. Some countries asked for an end to the "handshake agreement," as the Post called it, that allowed the United States to pick the World Bank president and Europe to choose the head of the International Monetary Fund.
But Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, who headed up the search for Wolfowitz's replacement, said he's confident that Zoellick will be found acceptable and that his experience could make arguments against his candidacy difficult.
Like many members of the Bush team, Zoellick paid his dues with previous Republican administrations. He began serving in the Reagan administration in the mid-'80s and worked his way up to White House deputy chief of staff in 1992.
He rejoined the private sector during the Clinton years, working at Fannie Mae and Goldman Sachs, until he became an adviser to Bush's 2000 election campaign. After Bush's victory, Zoellick was named U.S. trade representative.
One of his biggest accomplishments in that post was the entrance of China and Taiwan into the World Trade Organization. He also worked on trade agreements with Jordan and Vietnam, and he was reported to be comfortable and skilled in his role as an international negotiator.
After four years as trade representative, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice tapped him to be her deputy in 2005. He focused on China and the Sudan. But he only lasted about a year and a half in the job -- because, rumor had it, he was angry about being passed over for other top posts (including World Bank president) and was tired of playing second fiddle. He didn't have to do so in the private sector, where he became the managing director of Goldman Sachs.
Zoellick might skirt one early criticism of Wolfowitz: It's hard to argue with his qualifications. A National Public Radio correspondent said on the air yesterday that "especially for a Republican Washington insider, Zoellick is about as golden as it gets." During a news conference today to announce his appointment, Bush called Zoellick "a leader that motivates employees and builds constituent support and focuses on achieving goals."
The World Bank board will likely approve Zoellick to the post. But the initial objections -- that this pick, no matter how seemingly qualified, is still a product of the Bush administration -- could work against him once he's there.
An anonymous World Bank official, "who spoke on condition that he not be named for fear of alienating his new boss," told the Post that potential objections lie not with Zoellick personally, but with the people behind him. "People think Zoellick is highly intelligent and has a pragmatic mind-set," the source said. "But he's still from the same people who brought you the Iraq war, the same people who brought you Paul Wolfowitz and Donald Rumsfeld. There's immediate jaundice about his country of origin. Any American appointed by this president would carry that stigma."
Posted at 11:25 AM
Posted to:
Paul Wolfowitz, Robert Zoellick, World Bank
Share via
