Express Your Views on Why Wolfowitz Must Resign

-

wolfowitz 2.jpg
A TWN reader has done a nice job of assembling key email addresses for World Bank officials who may have some influence on whether the corrupt actions of Bank President Paul Wolfowitz on behalf of his girlfriend and others justifies his resignation/firing.
For those of you who need a quick primer on Wolfowitz’s self-inflicted problems and moral lapses, see Sebastian Mallaby’s superb piece today, “The World Bank, Stuck in the Mud.” I also wrote on the Kevin Kellems and Robin Cleveland parts of this story long ago here — and had a reprise yesterday.
I just sent this note of my own to the following addresses — and you should feel free to as well:

Dear World Bank Official:
I am a writer and public policy practitioner in Washington, DC and blog at www.TPMCafe.com www.HuffingtonPost.com and www.TheWashingtonNote.com.
I have blogged about Paul Wolfowitz’s situation here:

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/002058.php
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-clemons/paul-wolfowitzs-hours-_b_45726.html

I want to express my dismay and regret that he has not had the personal strength to recognize that his nepotism has undermined whatever trust he held from those both within the bank and those outside who care about the Bank’s role and function in the developing world.
Wolfowitz’s campaign of anti-corruption measures within the bank is now a farce. For him to keep his job sends a signal to those inside the bank and to clients that pushing a deal for a brother, a friend, someone who scratches my back while he scratches theirs is something OK, worth doing at least until getting caught. And even then, no consequences.
Wolfowitz is a smart man. While I don’t agree with his foreign policy views, I do know that he has the ability to see that there is no alternative to this situation but resignation. His trying to wrestle against that reality may be evidence of a further corruption — real and in spirit — of Wolfowitz’s tenure at the World Bank.
You should play a role in calling for him to resign now.
Sincerely,
Steven Clemons
www.TheWashingtonNote.com

Here are the World Bank email addresses:

feedback@worldbank.org; dtheis@worldbank.org; cmuller@worldbank.org; hbridi@worldbank.org; osiemens@ifc.org; Jingram@worldbank.org; Yyoshimura1@worldbank.org; nmohammed@worldbank.org; Yduvivier@worldbank.org; Dvarela@worldbank.org; Acraig@worldbank.org; Schitale@worldbank.org; Rreinikka@worldbank.org; Jowen@worldbank.org; Achuecamora@worldbank.org; Avantrotsenburg@worldbank.org; Rrobinson@worldbank.org; Xzhu1@worldbank.org; Fbelhaj@worldbank.org; Cwallich@worldbank.org; Kgeorgieva@worldbank.org; Fkaps@worldbank.org; Dgaye@worldbank.org; Cluff@worldbank.org; Lgiovine@worldbank.org; Dreinermann@worldbank.org; Cbruce@worldbank.org; Jbriscoe@worldbank.org; Vturbat@worldbank.org; Nagrawal@worldbank.org; Orazzaz@worldbank.org; mrepnik@worldbank.org; DDollar@worldbank.org; mlopez@worldbank.org; Jhappi@worldbank.org; Mibrahima@worlbank.org; Mdia@worldbank.org; Aseth1@worldbank.org; Mkarlsson@worldbank.org; Embi@worldbank.org; Aalmansi@worldbank.org; Mgbetibouo@worldbank.org; Zbadr@worldbank.org; Idiwan@worldbank.org; Afaiz@worldbank.org

But the single most important address you can write to is Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Robert Kimmitt — a very good guy in my view — but he holds many of the cards on whether Wolfowitz goes or stays:

Robert.Kimmitt@do.treas.gov

Be respectful. Kimmitt is first class and won’t be thrilled with the calls for action from the public — but he needs to hear from people about this.
While Bob Kimmitt is a moderate Republican and his brother, Mark Kimmitt, an accomplished General, his father — J. Stanley Kimmitt was a powerful Democrat in the country and was Secretary of the Senate. Bill Clinton in his youth met Stan Kimmitt and encouraged Clinton’s aspirations and career.
Years later, Stan Kimmitt did the same for me in a several hours long chat at the Biltmore Hotel in Los Angeles when I had helped organize a meeting with former Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield.
Members of the Kimmitt clan are deeply embedded with a code of dedicated public service — and my hunch is that Wolfowitz’s conduct violates every fiber of what “a Kimmitt” believes a public servant should represent.
— Steve Clemons

Comments

47 comments on “Express Your Views on Why Wolfowitz Must Resign

  1. Wolfowitz Resign says:

    Visit this blog for the latest. A link to your blog has been posted at the bottom of the page.
    http://www.wolfowitzresign.com

    Reply

  2. Des Rodgers says:

    Just recently discovered your blog, Steve. You’re doing a great job in gate-keeping. My disappointment with societies in general has induced a creeping pessimism that stifles any eff personal efforts at offering productive and positive suggestions for remedying the world’s ills.
    Your comments about Wolfowitz have failed to surprise me, as my initial and continuing impressions of this shifty-eyed, insidious individual have only proved that given half a chance, basic man – in all his insecure and selfish glory – will always resort to making whoopee, a la ‘fox in the chicken house’.
    And incidentally, is there any discernible difference in society between black (collar) crimes in the streets from white (collar) ones in the office corridors?
    Same difference, is it?

    Reply

  3. David Cohen says:

    There are two basic misconceptions running through comments on Wolfowitz: (1) That he is particularly intelligent and a deep thinker, (2) That he brought in Kellems and Cleveland to support him. Re. (1) the guy has about average smarts for a senior policy wonk in Washington. Where he scores is his ability to keep his mouth shut (he is surprisingly quiet in meetings), while figuring out how to push his views through an organization without leaving a trace. Read all those “revealing” but empty emails of his on Iraq at DoD, and check his careful public statements on Iraq. This is a guy who has survived by never leaving his fingeprints at the scene of the crime. True, he screwed up with his girlfriend and forgot to wipe the fingerprints. He let his heart (or whatever part of his anatomy was then operative other than his brain) rule his head. Re. (2) Wolfowitz did not bring in Kellums and Cleveland to help him. In my view they were put there by Cheney and other neocon big men as guardians over his actions. Wolfie is in fact a foolish softie, a sometimes sentimental ideologue with high moral convictions, limited intellectual reach and an ability to blot out his past misdeeds and move on. The big men realized that if left usupervized, there was a risk that their pet “Wolfie” might be taught new tricks by his new owners, and defect to the Bank’s bleeding hearts club. So they put in reliable Republican Guards, low level hard line neocons, to ensure he did not stray from the righteous path and to report back to 1600 Penn HQ if he did. This is the Manchurian candidate, low tech Cheney/Rove style. Shame that Wolfie’s Republican Guards were so ethically blind that they did not see his kindness to his gal as anything to be concerned about. Cheney must be tongue-lashing Kellems: “You were meant to watch him, how could you let the idiot f**k up like that?”

    Reply

  4. buck turgidson says:

    Linda,
    Although Wohlstetter might have influenced Wolfowitz more than Strauss, Straussian influence is what Wolfie has in common with the rest of the neo-con bunch. Some got it directly from Strauss, some from Bloom, some just made it up. There are several theories that they radically misinterpreted Strauss, although I am not buying it, having reread a lot of Strauss recently.
    Strauss misread Nietzsche, admired, then despised Spinoza, then blamed all the world ills on Heidegger (who also misread Nietzsche). His followers replaced Heidegger with liberalism and–voila!–we got the current crop of neo-cons. OK, so I am faking it a bit–Strauss was no fan of liberalism either, but it meant something different to him than it does to the neo-cons.
    In any case, if you look at my specific comment, I did not say that Wolfie was influenced by Strauss. In fact, I commented that he broke with the Straussian ethic (never to be wrong).

    Reply

  5. bryanwilkins says:

    By the way to where was Wolfie’s gal seconded??Elizabeth Cheney’s shop at state–You know– daughter of Darth Vader Cheney.

    Reply

  6. anon says:

    The e-mail addresses posted are, to the best I can tell, a bunch of mid-level Bank staff. Bank staff have already demanded his resignation through the Staff Association. The decision is with Executive Directors and their Governors, as it should be, not the staff.

    Reply

  7. Bryan Barfield says:

    Kind of makes me wonder how it all started…
    PW: “Well, I’ve done everything I can at defense. Maybe I could take that job running World Bank my girlfriend has been telling me is coming open”.
    GWB: “I know you don’t have any banking experience but, you did a heck of a job getting this Iraq thing going, I,m sure you’ll fit right in over there. Oh, don’t say anything about the whole girlfriend stuff…”
    3 months later;
    PW: “What? I can’t work with my girlfriend? I’ve got the rest of my friends jobs here. What could possibly be wrong with working with my girlfiend?
    McKR: “Just get her sent to State. I’m sure she will fit right in.”
    PW: “What if she gets pissed?”
    McKR: “Give her a raise. Everybody happy”.
    PW: “Man, I love working with these guys!”

    Reply

  8. sona says:

    The world accepts that the US political system is capable of of restoring its own administrative misdemeanours. There is, however, a problem with the US practice of POTUS nominations to international organisations aka the World Bank and the IMF, with an unquestioning Congress devoted more to ideological and party partisanship than it’s members’ fealty to the US Constitution.
    A large number of recipient countries do not have any say in vetting the POTUS nominee approved or not by a corrupt Congress. Yet they are often the countries that pay the ultimate price.
    Is it too much to ask that the so called victors of World War II be removed from decision making processes, particularly regarding recruitment of top officials, including Board members and Presidents?
    Shareholders indeed have the power in a corporate entity. The World Bank and the IMF are not capitalist private enterprise entities. Their role lies in the international sphere and should come come under the scrutiny of the UN General Assembly.
    If we want the UN to have any relevance at all, it has to be the General Assembly rather than the Security Council.
    Direct progressive taxation does not entitle any individual taxpayer to direct personal tax contributions towards ideological policies or nepotism. The same principle should apply to the World Bank and IMF Board of Directors and CEOs.

    Reply

  9. Pissed Off American says:

    A 200g salary, and Wolfie’s gal is sniveling about being “victimized”. Poor girl, she was subjected to an unwanted transfer.
    http://tinyurl.com/2fdyf6

    Reply

  10. Linda says:

    Daniel,
    “The International Organizations Immunities Act. Makes them and their employees exempt from taxation.”
    Does that apply only to foreign nationals or also to U.S. citizens? What is Wolfowitz’s salary at World Bank, and is he required to pay U.S. income tax?

    Reply

  11. Dirk says:

    Convention has it that the World Bank is always managed by an American while the IMF is always managed by a European.
    Europeans and others on the World Bank staff, even if they call for/agree to replace Wolfowitz, need the Americans to name the replacement.
    That said, it is hilarious that the staff hissed, booed and called out “resign” when Wolfowitz tried to defend his nepotism.
    Does anyone know the names of the countries that Wolfowitz placed on a list, without consulting staff, no longer eligible for loans because they were deemed “corrupt”?

    Reply

  12. Daniel CAZ Greenberg says:

    Oh! I actually know that one, Carroll!
    The International Organizations Immunities Act. Makes them and their employees exempt from taxation.

    Reply

  13. Carroll says:

    BTW…can anyone explain why these positions at the WB are exempt from income taxes?

    Reply

  14. Carroll says:

    Well I am trying not to get excited but I hope, hope,hope this is Wolfie’s demise. The WB board meeting in DC “released the memos Wolf wrote” today..heheheheh..
    You have to read this…Wolfowitz sounds like he thinks of himself as a Roman Emperor..
    ..”I direct”…hilarious.
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/5994b7c0-ea09-11db-91c7-000b5df10621.html
    …memorandums, dated July 27 2005 and August 11 2005, were among about a hundred pages of documents relating to the Shaha Riza affair released at the instruction of the bank’s board on Friday.
    ….snip..
    “Two weeks later, in the second memorandum of August 11 2005 – the existence of which was first revealed by the Financial Times – Mr Wolfowitz orders Xavier Coll, the bank’s vice-president for human resources, to offer Ms Riza a secondment package with specified benefits that go far beyond the simple promotion suggested by the ethics committee.
    There is no ambiguity as to who has decided which terms to offer Ms Riza.
    Mr Wolfowitz wrote to Mr Coll: “I now direct you to agree to a proposal that includes the following terms and conditions.”

    Reply

  15. Daniel CAZ Greenberg says:

    What could I say about PNAC that hasn’t already been said about Condottieri?
    I could got for a BLT about now.

    Reply

  16. Pissed Off American says:

    This piece includes the text of a letter World Bank employees wrote to the Office of Institutional Integrity, complaining about Wolfowitz’s apparently unethical and possibly illegal habit of giving cronies ridiculously high compensation packages. It wasn’t just his main squeeze that he was shoveling money to. Have you ever noticed that the only people that seem to surround Bush and this administration are absolutely the slimiest pieces of shit that humanity has to offer? I mean gads, you could expect one or two scumbags to slither past a responsible vetting process, but this administration seems to breed these turkeys. Just start with Chalabi, and work your way forward from there. Its a shame we can’t lock them all up in a compound someplace for a few months without sending food in. I’d be real interested in seeing who eats whom.
    http://tinyurl.com/2cnqab

    Reply

  17. Pissed Off American says:

    http://tinyurl.com/29e9jv
    “In a dramatic turn of events, Mr. Wolfowitz appeared at the bottom of the stairs below which Ms. Cave was answering questiong. Ms. Cave recognized the President and invited him to say a few words on his behalf. Mr. Wolfowitz said that he was “constrained to talk about the details” of the situation and that his “biggest mistake was that I didnt try hard enough to stay out of it” in reference to Ms. Riza’s external assignment. Finally, Mr. Wolfowitz stated that “I will abide by any remedies the Board proposes.” As Ms. Cave rebutted his comments members of the crowd began chanting “resign”. Visibly uncomfortable, Wolfowitz left with his advisors while Ms. Cave continued taking comments and questions.”

    Reply

  18. TokyoTom says:

    Steve, thanks for the link to your January 2006 post, which helps to explain the basis of your position.
    More is here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/12/AR2007041201822.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
    I am inclined to agree with you that Rumsfield must go, but do you really think that our allies are anxious to hand Bush another humiliation at this point in time? My own view is that unless Rumsfield resigns himself, he will weather this storm until 2008.
    That would be bad for the World Bank, but when did this Administration ever really care for improving our multilateral institutions?
    TT

    Reply

  19. Pissed Off American says:

    Whats the problem? Heck, he’s admitted he made a mistake, and he has said he is sorry. Cut the poor guy some slack, and give him a little time off. Maybe a week or so of suspension. Jeepers, maybe he and McCain can use the time for some picknicking in downtown Bagdad. Fried chicken, some cole slaw….
    Maybe Cheney can tag along.

    Reply

  20. steambomb says:

    ~~~~ feel sorry for Mr. Wolfowitz’s girlfriend though, she may be a very competent executive and with all this adverse publicity if she decides to leave the Bank employment (and consequently the State Department) and join a major Corporation, she will probably increase her salary manifold~~~~
    Lie down with dogs and get up with fleas.

    Reply

  21. Ajaz Haque says:

    Despite Mr. Wolfowitz’s neptistic behaviour, he is likely to survive this embarrassing attitude because the White House holds sway on the World Bank and the White House has already issued statements saying Mr. Wolfowitz will stay on the job.
    The problem is that the Europeans who hold a number of Board seats on the Bank Board do not have the courage to say openly what they are saying privately. After all they did object to his appointment in the first place but when it came to voting they fell in line. I suspect thsi time they will complain and then go quiet again.
    I feel sorry for Mr. Wolfowitz’s girlfriend though, she may be a very competent executive and with all this adverse publicity if she decides to leave the Bank employment (and consequently the State Department) and join a major Corporation, she will probably increase her salary manifold.

    Reply

  22. TLittle says:

    There is no reason for him to resign.

    Reply

  23. Carroll says:

    A word about the list to anyone mailing…
    Remove this address:
    Mgbetibous@worldbank.org..or your mail won’t go thru.
    However the others are going thru becuase I have received an auto response from several who are evidently in DC for a meeting..
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    From: Afaiz@worldbank.org Save Address | Headers
    To: “xxxxxxxxxxxxx
    CC:
    Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 16:02:25 +0300
    Subject: Faiz, Asif is out of the office.
    ——————————————————————————–
    I will be out of the office starting 04/12/2007 and will not return until
    05/03/2007.
    I will respond to your message when I return. Please contact Reem Hadra or
    Isabel Soares for any urgent business.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    From: Yduvivier@worldbank.org Save Address | Headers
    To: xxxxxxx
    CC:
    Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 10:01:28 +0100
    Subject: Yves A. Duvivier/Person/World Bank is out of the office.
    ——————————————————————————–
    I will be out of the office starting 04/12/2007 and will not return until
    04/21/2007.
    I may not read my emails every day. I’ll be in Washington April 13 to 17. For
    urgent matters please contact Nawal Merabet in our Algiers office –
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Three were returned because of they are not listed in Domino Directory ..whatever that is..does anyone know?
    Final-Recipient: rfc822;Yyoshimura1@worldbank.org
    Action: failed
    Status: 5.1.1
    Diagnostic-Code: X-Notes; User Yyoshimura1 (Yyoshimura1@worldbank.org)
    not listed in Domino Directory
    >>>>>>>>
    Anyway I am sure they will get read by someone in their offices and relayed.

    Reply

  24. Carroll says:

    Great!…
    I just send a very polite mail to Mr. Kimmet asking him to consider how Wolfowitz ‘s actions in his position at the WB further damage American creditability and the integrity of the WB itself.
    I think ordinary Americans should (intelligently and politely) weigh in when unethical US appointees reflect badly on our country and goverment.

    Reply

  25. TonyForesta says:

    Wolfowitz is one of a cabal of fascist warmongers, profiteers, and pathological liars in the Bush government who ghoulishly exploited the dead and horrors of 9/11, and ruthlessly deceived the American people into hurling our daughters and sons, and half of trillion of the peoples dollars into a costly, bloody, ill-concieved, incompetently mismanaged, woefully under accounted for, noendinsight horrorshow and war of choice in Iraq.
    Wolfowitz and the other fascists in Bush government are the unholy architects of the FAILING wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and in the socalled waronterror bent on advancing the criminal insanity, and imperialistic delusions of the Pax Americana neverendingwar and empire agenda and machinations, imposed by the terrible swift sword of America’s hypersuperior military and marauding the worlds oil and energy resources.
    Wolfowitz and the other fascists in the Bush government have betrayed, perverted, dismembered, and re-engineered the Constitution and the core principles upon which this nation was founded to conform to their fascist and criminal designs.

    Reply

  26. SJDS says:

    While the current scandal –“Rizagate” — may be what forces Wolfowitz to resign, his appointment was a mistake in the first place. It was, for the Bush Administration an “in your face” appointment and a show of American arrogance, not only in the appointment of a man without obvious experience in World Bank-related work, but one of the chief architects of the disastrous war in Iraq. As if that were not enough, his tenure there has been troubled and has hardly indicated good management. On a number of occasions he has made decisions with little consultation with those professionals who had in-depth knowledge. But given Wolfowitz’ general aversion to the administrative side of jobs he’s been in, I suspect that unless he has changed entirely, that too has made for a problem. In any case, given his machinations for his friend, any statements Wolfowitz might make now about corruption would be to invite mockery and derision.

    Reply

  27. Dan says:

    Just what made Mr. Wolfowitz “qualified” for that job in the first place? Seriously.

    Reply

  28. Linda says:

    Buck Turgidson,
    “Dr. Strangelove” is one of my favorite films, and fitting in with that. Wolfowitz claims that he was much more influenced by Albert Wohlstetter than Leo Strauss from John Cassidy’s profile of Wolfowitz in the 4/9/07 issue of “New Yorker:”
    “Much has been made of Strauss’s influence on Wolfowitz–in particular, Strauss’s rejection of moral relativism and his denunciation of totalitarian regiens. A more significant influence, Wolfowitz says, was Albert Wohlstetter, an ardent anti-Communist and an expert on nuclear-weapons strategy who was his dissertation advisor. (at University of Chicago). With Wohlstetter’s encouragement, Wolfowitz went to Wahsington in the summer of 1969 to work for the Committee to Maintain a Prudent Defense Policy, a nonprofit group that lobbied Congress to support the construction of an anti-ballistic weapons system. (At the committee, Wolfowitz met Richard Perle, who became a colleague in the Reagan Administration.”

    Reply

  29. Bernadette says:

    To David Corn:
    Well (sorry in advance for the condescension, triumphalism and immodesty but hey, everybody gets a turn, OK?):
    The staff of the World Bank, and the Staff Association are not the American public. The World Bank is not a micro-USA. The Bank staff demanded accountability from Paul Wolfowitz, the President of the World Bank Group, on their World Bank grounds. It’s up to you Americans to “nab” Paul Wolfowitz, member of your government, on yours.
    I can’t help but acknowledge however that the Bank staff would not have lived this quasi victory had the media (in particular the Washington Post via Al Merken, the New Yorker, and, mysteriously to me at least, the Financial Times) not reacted or reacted differently.

    Reply

  30. Newton says:

    I’m not much of a letter writer but thanks for inspiring me to get involved. I sent these comments to Kimmitt.
    Mr Kimmitt:
    I am simply a citizen and would like to express my concerns about the impact of Paul Wolfowitz’s apparent disregard for the rules of the World Bank in his seeking to ensure his romantic interest was personally enriched. This is exactly the sort of behavior and corruption that Mr. Wolfowitz pledged to combat in his term at the institution.
    How can he be taken seriously as a reformer based on his own unethical actions?
    The United States can ill afford additional charges that internationally accepted rules of behavior, whether those of the World Bank or the Geneva Convention or the Kyoto protocol, do not apply to us. Our standing in the world is diminishing day by day and can only be halted by truly concerned, capable and ethical leadership.
    I urge you to do your part in helping restore confidence in the role of the United States on the world stage by calling for the resignation of Paul Wolfowitz.

    Reply

  31. Not-hungry-anymore says:

    Credit should be given where credit is due. So far, I haven’t seen a single reference made to the remarkable “Blondes Have More Fonds” piece posted in the Village Voice, in November 2005, for crying out loud! Check it out in the Bush Beat Archives at:http://villagevoice.com/blogs/bushbeat/archive/2005/11/morning_report_219.php
    I am wondering about the present avatars of the Cheney et al Foundations for the Future outfit, cited in the above piece. So far, in the context of the Wolfowitz-Riza story at least, the press generally alludes to it as “an NGO”. “An” NGO? An “NGO”? Yeahright.
    Can one die of shame?

    Reply

  32. steambomb says:

    Wow! Look at all these castles burning. The United States credibility is in the tank thanks to Bush and now the World Banks credibility is in extreme jepardy thanks to Wolfi. We sure have some great leaders on our side of the pond these days. (snark) no…. (extreme snark) but I think these times do warrant some snark. Dont they?

    Reply

  33. Marcia says:

    He should be fired because he broke the rules, put himself above the regulations, I don’t know if he broke the law, and did this from a position of great power. His removal would serve as an example and certainly would not shock by inflicting a punishment out of porportion with ilicit behavior.
    He no longer has any credibility in his function of acting and speaking for an international organisation.
    His former misdeeds would merit a much harsher punishment.

    Reply

  34. steambomb says:

    Because he is a crook. What more needs to be said?

    Reply

  35. pauline says:

    April 13, 2007
    The Fall of Wolfowitz?
    You can —
    * make a misleading case for war,
    * support a secret internal Pentagon effort to manipulate and hype intelligence that supports the case for war,
    * invade another country without preparing for what comes after the invasion,
    * dismiss the warnings of a general who says hundreds of thousands of troops will be necessary to secure that country after an invasion,
    * falsely claim that the war will cost little,
    * assume (wrongly) that the people of the invaded country will be nothing but pleased,
    * and mismanage post-invasion operations and plans and, thus, fail to prevent societal conflict and chaos that causes the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians.
    And nothing happens. In fact, you are subsequently awarded with a medal and a plum job.
    But —
    if you use your influence to get a pay raise for your girlfriend, well, then, you’re in big, big trouble. See here. It’s sort of like nabbing Al Capone on tax evasion.
    http://www.davidcorn.com/

    Reply

  36. bubba says:

    Steve,
    Yes. Thank you very much for taking the lead on this. Once again, a figure with contacts to the current sadministration is foisting a do as I say not as I do policy upon the rest of the world. The world is now very tired of this, especially those that actually work very hard to try and improve the lot of the poor worldwide. Wolfowicz’s presence alone now harms the mission of the World Bank. As noted in your comment, Wolfowicz admittedly participates in corrupt practices, and although the World Bank’s mission was not one of fighting corruption, Wolfowicz himself has made fighting corruption a World Bank mission, and his actions speak volumes regarding the scope of his honesty, clarity, ability, agenda, morality. He is a stain on the World Bank and everyon associated with it. He must go.

    Reply

  37. buck turgidson says:

    Wolfie went through three of the four steps on the way to resignation. He first denied anything happened, then admitted to facts, but denied any wrongdoing, then admitted wrongdoing and begged forgiveness. There is only one step left…
    I have a simple observation and that’s a reminder where Wolfie came from. He’s been steeped in the darkest caves of the Bush administration–and that was after he was suckled on Nixonian ethic earlier in his life. He simply thought that he could get away with the same sort of unabashed nepotism that’s rampant in the current administration. Not that other appointment by Bush are any more competent than the ones related to top Republicans–I usually refer to this as a case of “intellectual nepotism”.
    Of course, it’s a hard-core part of the Neocon Straussian ethic never to be wrong. So Wolfie’s admission already has put him outside the circle. I expect the ax to drop any moment. Perhaps he can share a park bench with Imus in the near future.

    Reply

  38. JohnH says:

    Ah yes, “American moral leadership,” a quaint oxymoron. The Wolfowitz story highlights the moral bankrupcy of American foreign policy.

    Reply

  39. James Joyner says:

    A letter writing campaign strikes me as unnecessary. The World Bank Group Staff Association has already demanded his resignation, he’s being booed by the staff, and the Financial Times has called for his ouster. I’d be surprised if he lasts the weekend.

    Reply

  40. reveal says:

    Dropped this at the previous thread but it belongs here, must be getting old(er)…
    Don’t know whether to laugh or cry… check out the Department of Institutional Integrity at the World Ban’s web site. Reads like some satire from Vonnegut.
    Also, another e-mail from that site that I wrote to:
    investigations_hotline@worldbank.org
    It is used to report Fraud and Corruption…
    Let’s get this embarrassment to our republic out of this position ASAP.

    Reply

  41. pauline says:

    from —
    Wednesday, July 16, 2003
    Key Officials Used 9/11 As Pretext for Iraq War
    by Jim Lobe
    “But the evidence about Rumsfeld is even more dramatic. According to an account by veteran CBS newsman David Martin last September, Rumsfeld was “telling his aides to start thinking about striking Iraq, even though there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the attacks” five hours after an American Airlines jet slammed into the Pentagon.
    Martin attributed his account in part to notes that had been taken at the time by a Rumsfeld aide. They quote the defense chief asking for the “best info fast” to “judge whether good enough to hit SH (Saddam Hussein) at the same time, not only UBL (Usama bin Laden). The administration should “go massive…sweep it all up, things related and not”, the notes quote Rumsfeld as saying.
    Wolfowitz shared those views, according to an account of the meeting Sep. 15-16 of the administration’s war council at Camp David provided by the Washington Post’s Bill Woodward and Dan Balz. In the “I-was-there” style for which Woodward, whose access to powerful officials since his investigative role in the Watergate scandal almost 30 years ago is unmatched, is famous:
    “Wolfowitz argued (at the meeting) that the real source of all the trouble and terrorism was probably Hussein. The terrorist attacks of Sept 11 created an opportunity to strike. Now, Rumsfeld asked again: ‘Is this the time to attack Iraq'”?
    “Powell objected”, the Woodward and Balz account continued, citing Secretary of State Colin Powell’s argument that U.S. allies would not support a strike on Iraq. “If you get something pinning Sept 11 on Iraq, great”, Powell is quoted as saying. But let’s get Afghanistan now. If we do that, we will have increased our ability to go after Iraq — if we can prove Iraq had a role”.
    Upon their return to Washington, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz convened a secret, two-day meeting of the DPB chaired by Perle. Instead of focusing on the first steps in carrying out a “war on terrorism”, however, the discussions centered on how Washington could use 9/11 to strike at Iraq, according to an account in the Wall Street Journal. Unlike Ahmed Chalabi, the head of the opposition Iraqi National Congress (INC), neither the State Department nor the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was invited to participate in the meeting.”
    http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0716-10.htm

    Reply

  42. Roland says:

    Steve, kudos for taking the lead on this!
    Article at the NYTimes makes a couple of add’l points re Wolfowitz meeting with his employees:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/13/world/13cnd-wolfowitz.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin (!!)
    Couple of points: Do our international organizations really have greater transparency than the US government (e.g., DOD)? How much more of this venal, self-serving behavior was Wolfowitz guilty of at the Pentagon?
    Cheers,

    Reply

  43. Zathras says:

    Perhaps your readers should ask Robert Kimmitt whether he wants to be head of the World Bank himself.

    Reply

  44. liz says:

    aren’t there a few more NEO PEOPLE to get rid of too??? Who is next??? Personally I am doing my patriotic duty and when I tell ya’ll the results, you may be even more horrified- if that is possible.

    Reply

  45. pauline says:

    August 7, 2003
    Wolfowitz Lets Slip Iraq Was Not Involved in 9/11; No Ties to Al-Qaeda
    By JASON LEOPOLD
    Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, one of the main architects for the war in Iraq, admitted for the first time that Iraq had nothing to do with the September 11 terrorist attacks, contradicting public statements made by senior White House and Pentagon officials whose attempt to link Saddam Hussein and the terrorist organization al-Qaeda was cited by the Bush administration as one of the main reasons for launching a preemptive strike in March against Iraq.
    In an interview with conservative radio personality Laura Ingraham, Wolfowitz was asked when he first came to believe that Iraq was behind the 9-11 terrorist attacks.
    “I’m not sure even now that I would say Iraq had something to do with it,” Wolfowitz said in the interview, aired Friday.
    Wolfowitz’s answer confirms doubts long held by critics of the Iraq war that the Bush administration had no evidence linking Iraq to 9-11 or al-Qaeda, but simply used the horrific terrorist attacks as a reason to overthrow Saddam Hussein and his Baathist regime.
    “I think what the realization to me is — the fundamental point was that terrorism had reached the scale completely different from what we had thought of it up until then. And that it would only get worse when these people got access to weapons of mass destruction which would be only a matter of time,” Wolfowitz said in the interview. “…What you really got to do is, eliminate terrorist networks and eliminate terrorism as a problem. And clearly Iraq was one of the country — you know top of the list of countries actively using terrorism as an instrument of national policy.”
    http://www.counterpunch.org/leopold08072003.html

    Reply

  46. muddy paws says:

    Steve, once again, many thanks for taking the lead on this, and for aggregating information about W — and who’s who in the Establishment who could have an effect on this — that might not otherwise be readily accessible.
    Many, many kudos.

    Reply

  47. Gadfly says:

    Wolfowitz should resign, or else be fired for the following reasons:–
    * He is a proven liar (i.e. regarding lies he told to mis-lead us into the Iraq war) and a person serving in such a prestigious post as President of the World Bank (or e.g. U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, etc.) should garner respect and trust. Wolfowitz is neither respected and his word cannot be trusted.
    * His judgements are unsound (i.e. regarding his mis-statements that Iraq Oil Revenues, totally approximately $100 billion, would be sufficient to pay for the Iraq war — and his refutation of General Shinseki’s estimate that at least several thousand U.S. troops would be needed to secure Iraq). Wolfowitz is a man of reckless and unsound judgements.
    * His corruption is clear. Awarding his “girl-friend” promotions and pay raises without clearing such actions through a board of inquiries smacks of the worst sort of nepotism — the kind that the neo-con Bushies, particularly Cheney (whose off-spring & their husbands enjoy). This behaviour besmirches the reputation of the World Bank — so, Wolfowitz uses his power for corrupt purposes.
    Just as John Bolton was clearly unfit to be U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations — so too Paul Wolfowitz has always been clearly unfit to be President of the World Bank. Such a scandal was bound to happen — for those who have studied Wolfowitz’s background observe that he is a dishonest- incompetent- and opportunistic politico.
    *

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *