Recently, the World Bank, an international institution designed to alleviate poverty and promote economic development in lesser-developed countries, was rocked by a scandal fit for a cheesy, made-for-TV movie. Paul Wolfowitz, the bank's president and former deputy U.S. defense secretary who helped plan the war in Iraq, manipulated the organization for nepotistic purposes.
Ultimately, he ended up illicitly siphoning more than $200,000 away from the World Bank and directly into the purse of his girlfriend in the form of pay raises. Well, love makes us do crazy things, right? This wasteful and corrupt act could have damaging consequences to a significant, global body.
This latest disgrace is not some minor infraction the media is amplifying for political or sensationalist purposes. It is a serious issue when any president of an organization that is supposed to uphold the principles of integrity and altruism is tied up in a web of graft.
Furthermore, the World Bank is already criticized regularly because it tends to promote a pro-corporate, pro-West agenda that is more focused on benefiting developed nations, rather than underdeveloped ones. Because the world's most influential countries run the bank, poorer countries are sometimes inclined to distrust the World Bank and turn down its aid.
The critics make a good point. The organization does need to be restructured to greater serve the needs of lesser-developed countries. In order to achieve these objectives, support, trust and cooperation from contributing and recipient nations is necessary.
With this latest embarrassment, Wolfowitz's misguided actions envenom prospective supporters by being associated with shady kickbacks and wastefulness. It rocks the already shaky foundation of trust, making it more difficult to garner support, much less cooperation. Economically disadvantaged countries suffer the greatest because of the lack of assistance.
Wolfowitz's actions demonstrate how easy it is for people in positions of leadership to abuse that power. If his actions go unpunished and he is allowed to keep his job, as some are advocating, it would only legitimize his criminal acts and thus further contaminate the reputation and mission of the World Bank.
Currently, the World Bank Staff Association—which represents the staff of 13,000 workers, who are rightfully appalled with his conduct—stated in a letter that he ""must act honorably and resign."" They also contend the World Bank functions on a cornerstone of trust and that his actions have substantially eroded that trust, making it difficult for the organization to function properly and productively.
In contrast, President Bush's administration continues to stand by its former employee, calling him ""a dedicated public servant"" and rallying for him to keep his presidential position. It is undeniable that this support stems from favoritism, and even if he is great at what he does, his dishonest actions clearly demonstrate that he is not responsible enough to handle a position with that much power.
Overall, to maintain the integrity of the establishment, Wolfowitz's resignation is obligatory. His staying in office would not only excuse, but also legitimize his actions. Although Wolfowitz made some positive strides while in office in Africa and in the reduction of global poverty, letting him keep his position would only reward him for his crimes.
However, the Bush administration historically has a knack for getting its way, so he may end up staying. With the way things are looking, I'm not holding my breath for a happy ending to this abysmal movie.
