Recent Blog Posts
-
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:26 am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:45 am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:00 am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:36 am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:37 pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:41 am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:32 am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:29 pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:09 pm EDT -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:47 am EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

Why Robert Zoellick Is Not a Good Idea for the World Bank
It's looking as though Robert Zoellick is going to be nominated to be the next president of the World Bank. According to Bloomberg, he would be nominated for a full five-year term, rather than serving out the last three years of Paul Wolfowitz's term. And, crucially, he has the support of the Germans.
Zoellick would have been a much better choice than Wolfowitz two years ago, when he was certainly on the shortlist of contenders for the job. But it's not two years ago any more, and the United States can and should do better.
Why is Zoellick not a great candidate? First and foremost, he has no demonstrated ability to run an organization of the size and complexity of the World Bank. Yes, he was US Trade Representative for a time, which is an important position with a reasonably large staff. But it's doesn't really compare.
What's more, as USTR, and before, Zoellick was best known for pushing bilateral free trade agreements over any attempts to get the global Doha round of trade talks to go anywhere. That was good for the US, but bad for the world as a whole: Zoellick is more of a unilateralist than a multilateralist.
Zoellick is also not a diplomat, and has no obvious ability to cut through the bureaucracy of the Bank and bend its board to his will. As deputy secretary of state he was famously marginalized to the point at which he resigned in frustration, taking instead his present job at Goldman Sachs.
Finally, Zoellick is not in any sense an expert on development issues. He cares, I'm sure, about the plight of the world's poor. But good intentions are not enough: the Bank needs someone with real expertise. And that, he lacks.
In fact, Zoellick really has no qualifications at all for this job, beyond an understanding of international finance. What's more, I'm quite sure that the Bank's staff are well aware of his limitations, a fact which in itself will limit his ability to effect change. It will be depressing indeed if he's railroaded through by the US and Germany.






