The division over the fate of Georgieva, which casts a shadow over the IMF Annual Meeting

The split between the U.S. and Europe about whether Cristalina Georgieva should stay in her post will cause the IMF chief to obscure this week’s fund’s flagship annual meeting as Washington wants her to go. Although set to, European forces tend to keep her.

Georgieva’s position as managing director of the fund has been under pressure since the accusation last month. Manipulating data Supporting China in its previous role at the World Bank. The 24 members of the IMF’s executive committee are divided into two camps, one of which is the fund’s two largest shareholders, the United States and Japan, while France, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom are more supportive and on the issue. The problem, according to those who were briefed.

At last week’s two-day meeting, the board of directors Could not reach consensus.. In a statement released late Friday, the IMF said the board had undertaken a “thorough, objective and timely review” of the situation, but has not yet completed the investigation. It said he wanted to do so “immediately”.

The annual meeting of the Fund with the World Bank begins on Monday.

Former IMF chief said that the degree of board disagreement over Georgieva’s fate has already undermined her ability to lead the future, leaving little choice but to be replaced by her. Said.

“Such openly divided and at best moderately enthusiastic support for its managing director risks hampering the effectiveness of the institution, both in terms of its policy advice and the credibility of its analysis,” said the former IMF. Officials said. “Even if she survives this storm, it will be difficult for Ms. Georgieva to continue as an effective leader of the institution for much longer.”

Critics argue that the allegations against Georgieva undermine the ability of the World Bank and the IMF to drive growth-promoting reforms and tell power the truth in dealings with the government.

However, her supporters emphasize her support for poor countries during the coronavirus pandemic and the readjustment of the fund’s priorities to address issues such as climate change and gender equality.

Georgieva, CEO of the World Bank, manipulated data in China’s favor in the 2018 World Bank Doing Business Annual Report when he took up the IMF’s top position in October 2019. Has been accused of doing so. She denied cheating.

Simeon Djankov, a senior bank official at Georgieva, was also accused of monitoring data changes and fostering a “toxic” environment of threats and blackmail to staff. He did not respond to requests for comment.

The accusation was filed in a report commissioned by the World Bank’s board of directors from law firm Wilmer Hale. Release September 16th.

Progressive economists have fought a corner of Georgieva. Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University Written in the Financial Times “It will be a dangerous and costly surrender for anti-Beijing hysteria,” she said.

Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate and former World Bank Chief Economist, describes his efforts to eliminate her: “coup d’état” And Wilmer Hale reports it as “hatchet work”.

In a statement released by a spokeswoman held by Georgieva last month, six former World Bank officials defended her as “a person of maximum integrity and commitment to development.”

Her supporters also point to Georgieva’s record during the coronavirus crisis.

She emphasized the unequal global response to the pandemic and directed the IMF’s emergency funding to the 100 poorest countries in the world. She also pushed for a $ 650 billion IMF allocation. Special drawing rights, Semi-reserve assets equivalent to newly minted money.

The African government and other states have provided her voice support in recent weeks.

However, critics of Georgieva say the Wilmer Hale report’s claims should be focused on their impact on the credibility of both the World Bank and the IMF as providers of gold-standard economic data.

Former World Bank Chief Economist and IMF Vice President Anne Osborn said the case “generally worries about the future.”

“If this is somehow allowed to pass, I’m worried that more governments will be under more pressure to change more numbers in a more favorable direction,” she said. “Not everyone …[will] I give up, but there are staff and management to do so. If you haven’t done so yet, the situation gets out of hand. “

Georgieva’s most intense critics questioned her denial that she put pressure on the staff.

Paul Michael, the Chief Economist of the World Bank under Georgieva and the Nobel laureate who worked with her and Jankov, said the latter alleged action should be interpreted as “at the request of knowledge and Christalina.” “.

Some are worried that Georgieva’s fate may be determined by geopolitics rather than concerns about her achievements or the credibility of the two major multilateral institutions in the world.They are Escalation France’s anger at Australia’s decision to revoke its agreement to buy a French nuclear submarine between Washington and Beijing, and in favor of a deal between the United States and Britain to counter China.

The division over the fate of Georgieva, which casts a shadow over the IMF Annual Meeting

Source link The division over the fate of Georgieva, which casts a shadow over the IMF Annual Meeting

Back to top button