May 2, 2007


The following excerpt (in red) is from the
WSJ Opinion page
on the web.

World Bank Justice
Wolfowitz's resignation offers
a window into a
corrupt institution.

Friday, May 18, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

So after weeks of nasty leaks and media smears,
the World Bank's board of executive directors
yesterday cleared President Paul Wolfowitz of
ethical misconduct for following the board's own
advice on how to handle a conflict of interest
involving his girlfriend. And Mr. Wolfowitz in turn
will resign from the bank at the end of June.
Run that by us again?

We've said from the beginning that the charges
against Mr. Wolfowitz were bogus, and that the
effort to unseat him amounted to a political
grudge by those who opposed his role in the
Bush Administration and a bureaucratic vendetta
by those who opposed his anti-corruption agenda
at the bank. That view was vindicated by
yesterday's statement, which showed how little
the merits of the case against Mr. Wolfowitz
had to do with the final result.

Mr. Wolfowitz "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 directors said,
thus rejecting the findings of a rigged
investigating committee that had ignored key
evidence. The most damning judgment the
directors could muster is that "a number of
mistakes were made," including by the bank's
own ethics committee that had refused to let
Mr. Wolfowitz recuse himself from matters
involving his girlfriend, Shaha Riza.

In other words, this was all about politics.
And all that mattered to Mr. Wolfowitz's
accusers was to be rid of him, whatever
the pretext or methods. The least they
can do now is restore Ms. Riza to her job,
assuming she wants to be part of an
organization that treated her so shabbily.


Cogent and Compelling statements concerning what appears
to be a partisan attack at the World Bank, submitted by Paul
Wolfowitz and Shaha Riza.


Christopher Hitchens' say

No comments:


My photo