NY TIMES: I was wondering if you could describe how you came to be nominated for this position?
IWEALA: I wasn’t packaging myself as a candidate for the presidency of the World Bank. I have a very busy job as coordinating minister for economic development and minister of finance. But when this process began, African leaders started calling Goodluck Jonathan, the president of Nigeria, saying that they thought I was a candidate well qualified to lead the World Bank.
For African countries, this is an important institution. Their feeling, as it has been described to me, is that the World Bank succeeds or fails depending on what happens in Africa, because it is the continent that has the most complex development challenges and, now, the biggest opportunities, given how things have turned around.
They were looking for someone eminently qualified to lead in Africa and to lead globally. So, and again this is what I am told, they started calling my president with this thesis. The leader of the African Union. Jacob Zuma of South Africa. The president of Côte d’Ivoire. The leader of the World Bank in the Francophone countries. Goodluck Jonathan was bombarded with calls and letters. I think he decided, if I am getting pressure from all these leaders, I will allow her to go.
NY TIMES: What would your agenda be at the bank?
IWEALA: We need to move faster. The bank has to be quick, nimble and responsive in this global environment. I would like it to be much faster to get aid on the ground, and faster giving policy advice and help to ministers looking for it. I’d look to do things in days and weeks rather than months and years, and I have the bureaucratic knowledge, the knowledge of the institution, to make that happen.
But the premier goal should be helping developing countries with the problem of job creation. In country after country, the single most important challenge is how to create good jobs – in developing countries as well as developed countries. And a big challenge is youth unemployment, which I want to tackle very fast because of the other problems it creates.
There is an opportunity for a demographic dividend for developing countries if they address this issue. In my country, about 70 percent of the citizens are 30 years old or younger, and there are similar demographics in many other developing countries. The rest of the developed world is looking at a gerontocracy, but we’re looking at a youth bulge.
The World Bank is the premier institution to support young people, with all of its instruments to create jobs, build infrastructure and invest in human infrastructure. Also, green growth and climate change – that’s another issue I see as an opportunity for investment. And the World Bank has the knowledge and financial resources to help.
NY TIMES: Why do you think it is important for the World Bank to open up its presidential race so that candidates from emerging economies have the chance to lead it?
IWEALA: It makes eminent sense to do this – to open up global governance of these institutions to people in the developing world. If this is not done, there will be less interest in these institutions and people will go make their own. For instance, the BRICS [an umbrella group of the leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa] are talking about making their own development bank.
Besides, emerging and developing countries are contributing more than 50 percent of global growth! If it were not for the growth in developing countries, developed countries would be much, much worse off. So why are developing countries left out of the governance equation?
NY TIMES: Just to drill down on that, what would be the issue with emerging and developing economies’ setting up institutions that were more responsive to them and controlled by them?
IWEALA: It’s a huge, huge lost opportunity. I regard the World Bank as the premier instrument to lift people out of poverty and promote development, and not just in the poorest countries. It is a huge lost opportunity if they say that this resource that we have honed over these 70 years, that it doesn’t work for them anymore.
The World Bank’s best attribute is its huge staff. I’ve been there – I know these people, I know their passion and their commitment and their brilliance. If people walk away and say, ‘Listen, we can’t get a foot in the door,’ it will be a huge waste.
NY TIMES: What makes you the best candidate?
IWEALA: Development isn’t about just having knowledge in one area. You have to deal with macroeconomic and fiscal issues. Sectoral issues in agriculture, health, education, manufacturing. Agenda issues, like helping women and children and empowering them. Enterprise. Business development. Infrastructure. It’s about all of these issues and how they interplay.
That’s where I have strong experience. I’ve had a long career working in every region of the world, from Eastern Europe to Central Asia to the Middle East to Africa to Washington. I’ve worked in all of these regions, and I’ve learned so much that I could deploy as president. Indeed, I’ve been managing one of the most complex economies in the world – fighting corruption, promoting good governance, dealing with the macroeconomy.
It’s not about living in a developing country. And doing grass-roots development work is wonderful. But ultimately, this is about making tough choices that affect millions of lives. And I’ve done that. And I can hit the ground running because I know how to make this institution work for the world’s poor. I don’t have a learning curve.
When you listen to the media, it’s like it’s a done deal! I have tremendous respect for Dr. Kim. But you’re looking for the best. You’re not just looking for the acceptable. I can’t believe what I’m hearing: is this the same West that talks about democracy, openness, and meritocracy, and it’s like it has already been decided!
I think the media should call for a debate of the three candidates, like you have for other important positions, to see who really knows what they are doing. Let’s all of us have a televised debate showing the world what we can do, so people can judge for themselves who is the most qualified to lead. Click to signup for FREE news updates, latest information and hottest gists everyday
Advertise on NigerianEye.com to reach thousands of our daily users
They are at it again,the Europe and America has done it again,in every rumour they must be an atom of the truth,they have rigged the election they have sellected their candidate(Kim)but that would be too bad of Barack Obama whom i learnt he hails from Kenya- so bad.Ngozi do not mind all the rumours we are watching as the event unfolds
ReplyDeleteOkonjo, pls remember Nigeria in your decision making process concerning the development in Africa oooo. I beg in the name of God.
ReplyDeletewhat will b d benefit for a corrupt country like Nigeria if not to boro money nd waste?
ReplyDeletetime will tell as it all unfolds. Washington is in a difficult position, however it can count on support of Europe especially as it (Europe) retained the IMF job despite all the outcry for change. Ngozi will be better off with a clear support from the BRICS that means with Brazil having having its own candidate (who no doubt is also qualified) Washington is better off in competition. To succeed either Ngozi or Ocampo wud have to step down. Developing countries stand a better chance with one candidate against Dr. Kim.
ReplyDeleteThe US and Europe have the most votes. The US voted for a French Lady for Managing Director of IMF. The deal is that they will vote an American for World Bank. This is politics and is a done deal. If you want a developing country to get the Presidency, then you must make more money, buy more shares and control more votes.
ReplyDeleteJonathan, Ngozi and African Leaders should grow up. Who said this is democracy, it is NOT. It is survival of the richest. Don't you know that poor people are looked down on both here in Nigeria and abroad.