While international organizations such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the United Nations may still seem remote to most Americans, those institutions symbolize the increasing integration of a planet that deeply needs capable, trusted and farsighted guidance. Not so long ago, the United States was known as the “indispensable nation,” the one that could be relied upon to lead in times of crisis. That forfeited reputation is not only the world’s loss, but ours as well.
Cronyism, neglect, corruption, rigidity and plain stupidity—perpetrated by figures who had billed themselves (and were billed by the mainstream media) as the geniuses of our time—have exacted an awesome toll on the inheritance we received from previous generations. Our heritage of world leadership in the last century was built not upon military power alone, but arose from economic, diplomatic and moral foundations that somehow survived despite many earlier mistakes and even crimes.
With the advent of the Bush administration, however, our luck has obviously run out. Neither allies nor adversaries pretend to believe that the ludicrous characters sent forth by the president to represent us are statesmen. Not only does nobody much care what we think, but most people are now inclined to distrust and oppose us on principle.
The latest example of American decline is, of course, the embarrassing little scandal that has besmirched World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz. Always an overrated bureaucrat, he seems to have spent an inordinate amount of time and effort in recent years fashioning literal sweetheart deals for his paramour—a Tunisian-born Saudi named Shaha Riza—at the bank, the State Department and the Pentagon.
Even while Wolfowitz was serving as deputy defense secretary, he allegedly pressured a major defense contractor to hire Riza. For a month, she worked in Iraq on “democracy promotion”—a traditional American objective thoroughly discredited because of Wolfowitz and his fellow neoconservatives.
Considering Wolfowitz’s monumental failure at the Pentagon, where he overruled wiser and more experienced staff in preparing for the invasion of Iraq, his own promotion to the World Bank presidency was mystifying. His vaunted brilliance notwithstanding, he may well be the single most incompetent public servant of the past quarter-century, with the only significant competition coming from his former boss, Donald Rumsfeld. Together, they ensured that the occupation of Iraq had too few troops and too little planning, while allowing Republican cronies and crooks to siphon away billions of taxpayer dollars.
It was all going to pay for itself with Iraqi oil revenues, or so Wolfowitz had testified in Congress with his usual confidence. By the time that particular bill came due, he had moved on.
When Wolfowitz showed up at the World Bank, he touted another worthy agenda. Like John Bolton, his fellow ideologue appointed to serve as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, he said that he intended to promote reform and fight corruption. But in both cases, those high-minded purposes were thwarted by personal inadequacies—while zealous certainty in their own moral purposes blinded them to those shortcomings.
In Wolfowitz’s case, that characteristic arrogance enabled him to inveigh against corruption and scourge bank employees while he simultaneously arranged an extraordinary sinecure for Riza. She was seconded to the State Department, with an enormous tax-free salary exceeding the compensation of the secretary of state, where she worked under the supervision of Elizabeth Cheney (whose rank as principal deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs was owed wholly to her father, the vice president).
Under the deal set up by her boyfriend, Riza would automatically receive “outstanding” ratings, with a top position waiting for her on her return to the World Bank as soon as Wolfowitz’s term expires. Neoconservatives apparently believe fervently in merit and competition and hate affirmative action, unless their own careers (or the careers of their lovers) are at stake.
All this familial boodling proceeded happily while Vice President Dick Cheney whispered lies about the supposed “nepotism” behind former Ambassador Joe Wilson’s unpaid mission to Niger. The White House didn’t appreciate Wilson’s exposure of the truth behind the administration’s “mushroom cloud” fear-mongering about the perils of Saddam Hussein, so they exposed his wife’s CIA identity to smear him. Hypocrite is far too inadequate an insult to describe these people.
With its endless procession of tawdry scandals and buffoonish antics, the Bush administration often looks and sounds like a sitcom. In retrospect, as America and the world confront terror, disease, poverty and environmental peril, it will be recognized as a tragedy.
Joe Conason writes for the New York Observer
© 2007 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
Has Bush ever appointed anyone competent in anything but loyalty to his loathsome cause? Interesting for all the Christian Bible literalists, that their master, JESUS advised to beware the WOLF(owitz, or Wolfensohn) in sheep’s clothing. Just a useful metaphor among many. Bush and Rice ARE 4 letter words… something amusing to ponder.
The first three paragraphs of this article are terrific. You couldn’t state our present status any better or how we got here….
Its going to take a lot of work to regain our credibility in the world. It was lost by a few but I believe many will get it back.
The characterization (sp?) of Wolfowitz couldn’t be better.
I love you Joe Conason and miss you on the radio! Bush’s loyalty is loathsome, he knows nothing but cronyism, (not sure it is a word, but you get my point).
I suggest everyone read up on Leo Strauss. You will find that Wolfowitz and many of the Bush administration appointees studied and/or are followers of Leo Strauss.
Leo Strauss was himself an atheist, but believed that the founding fathers biggest error was separating the church from the state. He believed you could control people through religion and fear, and that people needed authoritative direction from the government.
” I’m shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here! “
The effective purpose of the World Bank and IMF is to enrich the already-wealthy by exploiting the poorest in the world. The continuation of this mission must, therefore, rely on increasing that market of poor people by pushing more and more of the world’s population into this category. Feudalism, an economic system prevalent in past centuries, is making a come-back. More and more of us are enslaved to financial institutions via our adjustable rate mortgages and incessant credit card debt. We work to service our debt. The cost of housing is beginning to reach levels that will condemn many who are “middle-class” to permanent renter status, or to poverty-level lifestyle in order to service the mortgage. Who are the “landed nobles” of our time? Where is all the wealth concentrating? Is there a way for regular people to avoid this trap and live a decent life without becoming indentured to servicing our debt? Can we pass on any legacy to our children? Or will each generation be doomed to being poorer than their parents?
Srauss was a Jew who’s poisonous Neocon philosophy was spread through that particular network from the university of Chicago to the blood soaked streets of Basra, Jenin, and undoubtedly the World Trade Center. This is the poison responsible for the current preparations for the attack on Iran which is guaranteed by AIPAC to occur regardless of what the rest of the world thinks or wants. You must identify the disease correctly before you can cure it.
Srauss was a Jew who’s poisonous Neocon philosophy was spread through that particular network from the university of Chicago to the blood soaked streets of Basra, Jenin, and undoubtedly the World Trade Center. This is the poison responsible for the current preparations for the attack on Iran which is guaranteed by AIPAC to occur regardless of what the rest of the world thinks or wants. You must identify the disease correctly before you can cure it.
Sounds familiar.
What can it be, what can it be?
Yes, I remember now.
It’s called antisemitism
Fd
By the way, how much Larouche pays for similar posts,
and how sick one has to be to qualify?
OK, we know. Very, very, very sick
Wolfowitz was only following orders and is now a scapegoat. Until responsibility falls on those who had commisioned and directed him, as well as many other pawns, the unprecidented abusive and deceptive policies of this adminisration will continue.
OK,
the last one.
I have less interest in what vocabulary you use, more
in actions.
Clearly, you have no compassion for Katrina victims (yes it’s time to talk about circles); you welcome antisemitism. Why not?
you can continue talking about circles. etc.
Sorry, wrong thread. It should be here.