# C'mon World Bank, find some balls! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 17, 2007, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391 "2007-05-17T00:42:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2007, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/1 "2007-05-17T00:42:16Z")
[Yet again the board can’t summon the guts to fire Paul Wolfowitz. They’ve adjourned for the day.](http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070516/pl_nm/worldbank_wolfowitz_dc_18;_ylt=AjN4b9b6Hf4j8CadPCu19nQE1vAI) They want him to resign and quietly disappear. Haven’t the world’s leaders learned ANYTHING about GWB and his minions? They have no shame, so they can’t be shamed into leaving voluntarily. Outside pressure means nothing. Only when Bush himself or others in the inner circle calculate the political cost of keeping another Loyal Bushie to be too high, does someone step down. The actual incompetence, criminality or moral turpitude of the individual means nothing in and of itself. Finally, someone who can actually be fired by someone OTHER than Bush, and they’re afraid of offending him! Feh. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2007, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/2 "2007-05-17T01:52:41Z")
[QUOTE=Boyo Jim] Finally, someone who can actually be fired by someone OTHER than Bush, and they’re afraid of offending him! Feh. [/QUOTE] The board rejected the white house’s proposal today, and the US called for a recess to regroup. I don’t think resolution will be long in coming, especially now that Canada and Japan have turned against Wolfie. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2007, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/3 "2007-05-17T01:58:32Z")
I recently read that no World Bank president has ever been fired before. It’s a controversial step and they’d probably prefer he left voluntarily. ---
**Author:** ![What\_the](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f4b2a3/32.png) [@What\_the](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_the)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2007, 11:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/4 "2007-05-17T11:36:21Z")
Better idea… why don’t they all resign in protest and the WB disband. Doesn’t do much good anyway. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2007, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/5 "2007-05-17T15:55:00Z")
[QUOTE=Little Nemo] I recently read that no World Bank president has ever been fired before. It’s a controversial step and they’d probably prefer he left voluntarily. [/QUOTE] Well, has any previous World Bank president stooped to Wolfowitz’s level of petty corruption and nepotism? (Genuine question; i don’t know the answer) If not, then it seems to me that this is precisely the time to get some balls, as the OP says, and make clear that this sort of behavior won’t be tolerated. Firing someone for what he did seems to me to be a no-brainer; why it should be considered controversial is beyond me. ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2007, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/6 "2007-05-17T17:01:58Z")
[QUOTE=mhendo] Firing someone for what he did seems to me to be a no-brainer; why it should be considered controversial is beyond me. [/QUOTE] Didn’t you hear? [It’s all a complicated conspiracy](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8470438&postcount=55)! ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2007, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/7 "2007-05-17T17:34:57Z")
Wolfowitz is asking for a determination that he did nothing wrong before he leaves voluntarily. Because it looks like that is indeed the case, this small request ought to be granted. I do not think he was necessarily the best choice for the job in the first place. However, the relationship was preexisting, was disclosed, and he attempted at all times to isolate himself from the salary decisions involving that person, only to have certain decisions forced upon him by arcane and conflicting rules. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2007, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/8 "2007-05-17T18:04:52Z")
> [@](#): > > However, the relationship was preexisting, was disclosed, and he attempted at all times to isolate himself from the salary decisions involving that person, only to have certain decisions forced upon him by arcane and conflicting rules. Indeed that is true, but that’s not what had people protesting: > **[BBC NEWS | Business | Q&A: Wolfowitz and the World Bank](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6655019.stm)** > > BBC News website Q&A on the Paul Wolfowitz affair at the World Bank. ---
**Author:** ![Andy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/aeb1de/32.png) [@Andy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2007, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/9 "2007-05-17T18:14:39Z")
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto] Wolfowitz is asking for a determination that he did nothing wrong before he leaves voluntarily. Because it looks like that is indeed the case, this small request ought to be granted. [/QUOTE] This story has been in the news here several times, but it wasn’t until this morning that I realised that this **wasn’t** a straightforward case of nepotism. Wolfowitz did try to have these issues looked, did not unilaterally deal with his partner and this isn’t a good guys versus bad neocon situation that it first appeared to be. I almost feel sorry for the guy, then I remember Iraq and feel much less sorry for him. This [FT](http://www.ft.com/cms/s/828b4360-fbfc-11db-93a4-000b5df10621.html) link spells out the situation. I’m sure it’s common that nuance is lost in news reporting, but I’m rather suspicious that the lack of detailed reporting has been intentional to allow the listener/viewer to form the \*desired \*opinion… IMO of course. ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Badger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/848f3c/32.png) [@Dead\_Badger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Badger)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2007, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/10 "2007-05-17T18:34:29Z")
[QUOTE=CalMeacham] Indeed that is true, but that’s not what had people protesting [/QUOTE] No, it’s his actions regarding the negotiation of Riza’s terms of departure, but he was (as far as I can see) only put in the preposterous position of having to negotiate those terms personally _by the ethics committee themselves_. He appears to have done so under protest, and his first proposed solution of full recusal (inexplicably rejected by the ethics committee) would have avoided the problem completely. I have no love for Wolfowitz whatsoever, but I’m with the FT article’s conclusion; the advice given to him was ludicrous, and directly instructed him to act with a clear conflict of interest. Their advice, their fault. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2007, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/11 "2007-05-17T18:47:39Z")
> [@](#): > > No, it’s his actions regarding the negotiation of Riza’s terms of departure, but he was (as far as I can see) only put in the preposterous position of having to negotiate those terms personally by the ethics committee themselves. He appears to have done so under protest, and his first proposed solution of full recusal (inexplicably rejected by the ethics committee) would have avoided the problem completely. The ethics committee doesn’t have to agree to Wolfowitz’ terms. Having heard their decision, his actions afterwards still seem to have violated their requirements: > [@](#): > > In January 2006, an e-mail was sent to the bank by “John Smith” using a Yahoo address. This appeared to be from a staff insider and it accused Mr Wolfowitz of “important ethical lapses of a corrupt nature.” > > It complained about the level of Shaha Riza’s salary which it said had gone up from $130,000 to the $180,000 mentioned by Mr Wolfowitz. It also said that Mr. Wolfowitz had not submitted this increase to the bank’s board. > > It also complained about his appointment of two associates at salaries of around $250,000, net of income tax. > > … > There was staff dissatisfaction in the bank but it wasn’t until 28 March 2007 that the Washington Post gave details that generated new public comment. It reported that Ms Riza’s salary at the State Department (though she had been transferred in the meantime to a new organisation called Foundation for the Future) had risen to “$193,590, which is $7,000 more than Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice makes.” The increase, it was claimed, was more than double she would have got at the World Bank. Wolfowitz wasn’t forced into that – he operated on his own to violate the Ethics Boards guidelines. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2007, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/12 "2007-05-17T18:58:17Z")
What guidelines? Sounds to me like they were having him wing it. And instead of recusal in the first place, which would have made a hell of a lot of sense, they permitted a situation to develop where decisions like this could be made. Again, I do not think he can continue in his job there. But given the fact that a good portion of this mess can be laid at the feet of the committee in the first place (if not the whole thing) the right thing would probably be to just let Wolfowitz go with little fuss. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2007, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/13 "2007-05-17T19:04:35Z")
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto] the right thing would probably be to just let Wolfowitz go with little fuss. [/QUOTE] No one is stopping Mr. Wolfowitz from resigning. He himself could put an end to the fuss by writing a letter saying that he wishes to devote more time to his family. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2007, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/14 "2007-05-17T19:11:58Z")
> [@](#): > > What guidelines? Sounds to me like they were having him wing it. > [@](#): > > On 27 July 2005, it informally decided that there was a “de facto conflict of interest.” It rejected Mr Wolfowitz’s proposed solution, stating that it “does not consider recusal sufficient and would most likely at least propose relocation/absence of professional contact, which is the standard for spouses/declared partners.” > > …Because she had qualified for the senior job for which she was applying, she would be promoted to that grade and her pay would rise to its mid-point, $180,000 net, with annual increases of approximately 8%. That’s a clear guideline, and Wolfowitz agreed to it, grudgingly. No winging it at all. The complaints (apparently coming from non-Ethics Board members) said: > [@](#): > > In January 2006, an e-mail was sent to the bank by “John Smith” using a Yahoo address. This appeared to be from a staff insider and it accused Mr Wolfowitz of “important ethical lapses of a corrupt nature.” > > It complained about the level of Shaha Riza’s salary which it said had gone up from $130,000 to the $180,000 mentioned by Mr Wolfowitz. It also said that Mr. Wolfowitz had not submitted this increase to the bank’s board. > > It also complained about his appointment of two associates at salaries of around $250,000, net of income tax. > > No. There was staff dissatisfaction in the bank but it wasn’t until 28 March 2007 that the Washington Post gave details that generated new public comment. It reported that Ms Riza’s salary at the State Department (though she had been transferred in the meantime to a new organisation called Foundation for the Future) had risen to “$193,590, which is $7,000 more than Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice makes.” The increase, it was claimed, was more than double she would have got at the World Bank. The Ethics Board had no problem with the $180,000 salary, as they said, but it rubbed a lot of others the wrong way. I don’t know how it got to $193k. And the two $250k salaries seemed to rankle, as well. ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2007, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/15 "2007-05-17T19:20:23Z")
It would be nice if I actually believed that this was about Wolfie’s actions at the bank and not just an attack on Bush. Show me that the World Bank has a true set of rules that they pursue against ALL of their employees and there would be some credibility. I realize that the Wall Street Journal’s editorial pages are not known for much beyond being hard core right wing business focused, but Bret Stephens has a few things to say on this subject: [http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/bstephens/?id=110010086](http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/bstephens/?id=110010086) > [@](#): > > Since the original complaint was filed about Mr. Scholar more than a year ago, there has been no indication that any action has been taken by the board–and no way of finding out if the matter was even discussed. But a new complaint regarding Mr. Scholar was sent directly to eight members of the board this Tuesday. Signed “John Smith”–it is not clear whether the author is the same person who filed the earlier complaint–the one-page letter restates the allegation regarding Mr. Scholar’s undisclosed liaison with the bank employee. It also adds significant new detail: > > "Mr. Scholar has used his privileged position as an executive director to influence Bank staff to manipulate [Ms.] ---- job description in a way to suit her limited professional qualification. Without Mr. Scholar’s intervention she would clearly not occupy her present position. He has more to say about hypocrites and scandal at the World Bank here: [http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/bstephens/?id=110010012](http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/bstephens/?id=110010012) I say Wolfie should probably resign over this, only because he will not able to effectively lead the bank when employees are walking around with ribbons showing their desire for him to be gone. HOWEVER, after he leaves I would like to see an interim President who will run a complete audit from top to bottom of all employees and all programs. ANYONE with a hint of problem is gone. The whole place is gutted. THEN hire a new President who will rebuild the bank into a working model that understands modern finance, accounting, economics, trade and world development. I expect nothing more than Wolfie tossed to the wolves, however, and many more years of inneffective operations at the Bank. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2007, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/16 "2007-05-17T22:30:10Z")
[Wolfowitz to leave by end of June](http://www.theolympian.com/national/story/108921.html) > [@](#): > > Embattled World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz will resign at the end of June, his leadership undermined by the generous compensation he arranged for his girlfriend. > > His departure was announced late Thursday by the World Bank board. > … > “He assured us that he acted ethically and in good faith in what he believed were the best interests of the institution and we accept that,” the board said in its announcement of his resignation. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2007, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/17 "2007-05-18T01:43:48Z")
Looks like the best outcome that can be expected at this particular time. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2007, 8:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cmon-world-bank-find-some-balls/404391/18 "2007-05-20T08:18:03Z")
Wolfowitz leaving is seriously damaging to the World Bank’s credibility in my opinion. [This](http://www.usnews.com/usnews/biztech/articles/060403/3worldbank.htm) is a good article about the World Bank and its corruption problems. For example, one World Bank employee, with a salary of $56,000 or so bought a $455,000 home in 1993. Had $200,000 in renovations done to it, and financed the building of a $300,000 home for a female friend in Africa. Locals in one of the African countries he worked in _reported to the World Bank that he was receiving kickbacks and bribes in brown paper bags_, and the World Bank didn’t even open an investigation into him until years later. When they did, they said there was no evidence of wrongdoing, and commended him for his work. It wasn’t until Wolfowitz took over that the case got reopened and the crook was exposed for what he really was, someone who was getting rich off of money designed to help people who are living on _$1/a day_, and he has the nerve to illegally acquire vast sums of it? What did Wolfowitz do in comparison? Well, he took over an institution where his girlfriend worked, it wasn’t like she had the job because she was dating Wolfy, she’d been working there for _years_, dating back to the Clinton administration. She had to be moved out of the World Bank _to avoid impropriety_ Wolfowitz was totally on-board with this, and even wanted to recuse himself from decision making because of the possibility of him being seen as acting inappropriately. If you read the article I linked, you’ll read about a German company convicted of bribing officials in Lesotho to get construction contracts, the World Bank continued to award contracts to this German company before, during, and after the trial. Even after the court’s verdict was upheld in a Lesotho appeals court and its fine increased, the World Bank still didn’t stop sending funds. In fact, they still haven’t, and the company is responsible for about $5m worth of World Bank contracts. One World Back corruption auditor exposed glaring corruption problems with an Indian health initiative. After a report which highlighted various incidents of corruption and mismanagement in the program, he goes on to _recommend the World Bank continue funding_. It’s that kind of shit that should be pitted, not Wolfowitz (at least not for his actions at the World Bank.) Oh yeah, when Wolfowitz went against the auditor’s advice and refused to fund the program until anti-corruption controls were put in place, the executive board _rioted_. What kind of organization that works to allocate public funds consistently refuses to make much of its work public knowledge? All of the members of the Executive Board are bound by non-disclosure agreements about what goes on in their meetings, any allegations of misconduct or arguments for or against funding corrupt contractors is sealed and never revealed to the public. And the board itself is apparently “corruption friendly” going so far as to openly rebel against the head of the World Bank for having the nerve to stop funding a health program the World Bank’s _own auditors_ said was rampant with corruption and was _giving mothers and newborns drugs which were either substandard or actually dangerous to mother and child_. Many former World Bank employees get rich on consulting deals with the World Bank, prior to 2004 some were making $4,000/day consulting with the World Bank, many were making $1,500+ per day. Wolfowitz’ girlfriend was in a situation of being forced out a job where, by all accounts, she performed admirably. In what non-governmental situation where you have long term, salaried employees who probably have extensive employment agreements can you just boot them out because the new CEO has a personal relationship with them and give them no severance of any kind? She was obviously qualified enough to make something like $130,000/year at the World Bank. Is it really a stretch that her total compensation, including money from her new job at State + continuing money from the World Bank payroll equaling $195,000 a year was really that out of line? These kinds of set ups appear to be part and parcel “normal” at the World Bank. When you have persons who have been observed taking kick backs and living vastly beyond their means not being investigated for years, but Wolfowitz being crucified over something that might, possibly, be somewhat inappropriate you have what I call a double standard. Oh, yeah the World Bank’s board of executive directors on 5/18 _cleared_ Wolfowitz of any wrongdoing (the alleged wrongdoing being following the executive board’s advice on how to handle the situation.)