The contest for the World Bank presidency has come and
gone. The American-favoured candidate,
the Asian-American Jim Yong Kim got it, our own Ngozi Okonjo Iweala lost out.
Pundits were of the view that Iweala was more eminently qualified for the post
than Yong. One of the many arguments bandied for the superiority of Iweala, an
economist by training, over Yong was her vast experience in the institution
which she served for over two (2) decades, a career that climaxed with the
holding of the position of the Managing Director of the Bank. Compared with Yong who is a health expert, health
issues being no less important index of human development, Iweala towers
mightily above.
Also the fact that Iweala is from a continent that is
bedeviled by serious underdevelopment issues, which the bank is said to be established
with the primary aim of addressing in the first place, should ordinarily give
her an edge over Yong after all it is said that he who wears the shoe knows where
it pinches the most! There is no doubt
today that Africa is the home of poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, income
inequality, increasing child and maternal deaths, massive corruption, gender
inequality, among many other such ills.
Therefore, a World Bank president from a background characterized by
these ills is most likely to be more proactive in addressing them or so it is
thought.
It is also argued that the notable contributions of
Iweala in negotiating debt relief for Nigeria during her reign as the country’s
Finance Minister in the Obasanjo II administration, debatable in terms of
tangible economic benefits to the country as it were, was as well a pointer to
her vast experience in high level international financial negotiations, a skill
that is not only desirable but also vital for success in such sensitive
position as World Bank President.
Furthermore, the fact that continental politics and the
quest for supremacy in the region between Nigeria and its archrival South
Africa was set aside to jointly sponsor the candidature of Iweala made a very
strong statement of the continent’s resolve to forge a common front for
adequate representation in the World Bank based on strong merit rather than
national sentiments. Also the fact that
the candidacy of Iweala received the blessings of many World Bank former
employees and leading financial tabloids across the world is an eloquent
testimony not only of her sterling qualifications as an experienced economist
but also of her general acceptance across the globe.
It is thus, an irony that in spite of the picture
depicted above, Iweala lost the job to a less qualified and equally less
experienced contender just because he had the blessings of the sole super power
and its allies in the European Union.
This incident once more brings to the fore the question
of the very negative implications of Africa’s and indeed other third world
economies’ association with these metropolitan financial institutions. It is on
record that in order to address the lingering economic problems of the global
south the trio of World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Trade
Organisation (WTO) recommend or even out rightly enforce policy templates on
these disadvantaged countries, policies that over the years proved to be cure
worse than the disease.
For instance it is on record that one of the causes of
the numerous socio-economic problems bedeviling Nigeria today have their roots in
the adoption of the World Bank/IMF’s recommended Structural Adjustment
Programme in 1986 under the General Babangida Administration. This
was a policy which focal points includes currency devaluation, removal of trade
barriers, privatisation of public enterprises, removal of subsidies, less
government participation in economic activities, etc.
It is on record that these policies played key roles in strangulating
the country’s economy through destruction of its infrastructural and industrial
base occasioned by harsh operating environment and unfair competition with
imported goods from countries with cheaper production costs. For instance, the Manufacturers Association
of Nigeria (MAN) reports that: a total of 834
manufacturing companies closed shop in 2009 as a result of their inability to
continue to cope with the challenges posed by the harsh operating environment
in Nigeria. The implication of this according to Dr. Warea Thomas an economic
analyst with UNDP is that “when a company stops operation, the workers there
become the frontline victims. If 834 firms were officially given by MAN to have
closed shop in 2009, it is easy to speculate that not less than 83,400 jobs
were lost in that year alone; if we assume that they were all medium-size
manufacturing firms, with each having 100 workers” (Punch Newspapers 31/10/2010
edition).
The negative consequences of this
state of affairs cannot be over-stated.
For instance it is a fact that the collapse the nation’s industrial base
is substantially connected to the soaring rate of unemployment and by
implication rising poverty level and crime rates in the country which are major
indicators of under-development. It has
equally led to the near extermination of the middle class with the nation’s
abundant wealth concentrated in the hands of a few thus consistently widening
the income inequality gap between the rich and the poor.
Furthermore, the World Bank and IMF
policies have played substantial roles in the eruption and escalation of social
conflicts in Africa which over the years have claimed many innocent lives and
left countries like Somalia largely ungovernable and many others in total disarray.
For example, in his work entitled “The Political Failure of Globalisation in
Africa”, the late erudite scholar Professor Sam Aluko stated that “the 1990 Rwandan ethnic strife between the Tutsis and
the Hutus was largely fueled by the collapse of the Rwandan economy under the
tutelage of the IMF.”
Perhaps, the full implications of the Rwandan genocide
are as depicted by wikipedia.com in its analysis of the conflict. It recorded
that out of a population of 7.3 million people–84% of whom were Hutu, 15%
Tutsi and 1% Twa – the official figures published by the Rwandan government
estimated the number of victims of the genocide to be 1,174,000 in 100 days
(i.e. 10,000 murdered every day, 400 every hour, 7 every minute). It is
estimated that about 300,000 Tutsis survived the genocide. Thousands of widows,
many of whom were subjected to rape, are now HIV-positive. There were about
400,000 orphans and nearly 85,000 of them were forced to become heads of
families.
Furthermore
the relationship between African and other underdeveloped economies and the
entire imperialist financial architecture is designed to perpetually enslave
the former through an interminable debt chain. Nigeria is a living example of
this assertion. According to Aluko, “the total externally borrowed money by
Nigeria was about $17.5 billion between 1978 and 2000. Although $32.5 billion had been repaid to the
external creditors between 1978 and 2000, Nigeria still owed the external creditors
$28.5 billion as at the end of year 2000.
However, the IMF and World Bank had been contending that at the
beginning of year 2001, Nigeria still owed $34.5 billion and not $28.5 billion
and that Nigeria must reach accord with the London and Paris Clubs of creditors
on the debt issue before any rescheduling or relief to her would be considered.”
The above are just a few of the very negative
consequences of the influences of IMF, World Bank and WTO on third world
countries in the light of which it becomes expedient for African countries to
rethink their association with these institutions and chart a new course for
realistic, home-grown development strategies that will see to rapid human
progress in their territories. Leaving
these economies to the dictates of the ‘market’ has proved to be not only
unrealistic but catastrophic as well.
It is a fact of history that America under President
Franklin Roosevelt used the machinery of government instead of market mechanism
to rescue its economy from the great depression of 1929 through the famous “new
deal”. In this deal government might was
deployed to rescue America’s collapsing economy, to construct roads, bridges,
dams, to provide stable electricity all necessary ingredients to industrial
growth and expansion. Moreover, in the
wake of the ongoing global economic meltdown, why did the Bush administration
inject billions of dollars to save America’s collapsing giant financial
institutions, a gesture which extends into the present regime of Barack Obama?
After all one thinks that what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander
as well.
It is therefore self-evident that the collaboration by
the western powers to foist a weaker candidate as the President of World Bank
to the detriment of Africa’s more qualified and more experienced candidate is a
strong demonstration of not only their desire but also strong resolve, to
maintain stranglehold on these institutions as a lever for further entrenchment
of their imperialist hegemony over the rest of the world. Not that Africa’s holding
of the Presidency would have made much difference anyway, but it only goes to
show that like in George Orwell”s Animal farm, in these institutions all
animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.