“The administration has been told that its battle to save Wolfowitz cannot be won,” said a European official, who like others who discussed the matter spoke on the condition of anonymity because the matter is confidential. “His relationship with the board is not only damaged. It is broken.”So they want him to collect salary while doing nothing for the poor? He'd be one of them! Note that if the source is correct, all of this is being done before Wolfie has the chance to respond. Justice, euro-elite style. The same kind the Bank imposes on its poor, brown clients. Do go read that New Yorker profile.
Bank officials say that the growing determination to oust Mr. Wolfowitz has led to a polling of the 24 members of the bank board and that a majority favor his ouster.
It was not clear why the board was not preparing simply to vote to oust Mr. Wolfowitz from his job. The bank’s governing articles say that a president ceases to hold his job if the board so decides.
Instead, the board appeared to be searching for language to attract a majority vote and also to represent the strongest possible rebuke that would serve as the functional equivalent of an ouster by making his situation untenable and all but halting his ability to travel, meet with foreign leaders, negotiate on policy or make personnel decisions.
Update: I hope this NPR opinion piece on Wolfowitz is a joke. I think it is. Sometimes it's hard to tell, especially if one is riled up, as I am about the World Bank coup (although, frankly, I'm less upset about the coup than about "my" side's disinterest in defending a just man). Unfortunately, the attitude betrayed here is what I have heard from several folks who ought to be rising to Wolfie's defense: yes, he's completely innocent. Yes, he's doing a great job and being savaged by snakes at a corrupt institution, but --eh, what do you expect? Cynicism of that sort is indecent.
