News of Mr Wolfowitz’s nomination was received with shock and awe by the international community. Predictably, there has been an effort to put a consoling face on the fact of Mr Wolfowitz’s appointment. That effort has had two major themes. The first was to draw parallels, nearly 40 years apart, between Mr Wolfowitz and a previous bank president, Robert McNamara. Both men were senior in the US defence department during unpopular wars (Vietnam, in Mr McNamara’s case). Yet since Mr McNamara belied his past to reinvigorate the bank, so Mr Wolfowitz may do the same.
But close scrutiny of his career shows that Paul Wolfowitz is no Robert McNamara. Mr McNamara was a technocrat; Mr Wolfowitz is an ideologue. Mr McNamara was not only secretary of defence but also president of Ford Motors before running the bank; Mr Wolfowitz is a career deputy. Mr McNamara was a manager; Mr Wolfowitz is a policy-wonk who has run nothing more substantial than a university sub-faculty. His experience as a US ambassador to the Suharto regime does him no favours, either.
The other theme being played to welcome him is that he will carry clout within the White House. But he is damaged goods within US domestic politics. His support for the invasion of Iraq and his boasts of the ease of its reconstruction make it almost impossible for him to win Congressional confirmation for any future government position. As World Bank president, he won’t get Mr Bush’s ear, but he certainly has had the elbow.—Dawn/The Guardian News Service.
