

The World Bank-IMF meetings

Money, votes and politics

Battles over money and power at the World Bank and IMF

See article

Readers' comments



The fact of the matter is that the world leaders must realise that exclusive clubs like the G7 are a thing of the past. The rich European countries don't realise the need to include the major players of the developing economy like China and India, giving them more voting power at major summits.


A Naive thought indeed but: has China already proved that it deserves to be accepted internationally as a main moderator in international finance?

In as much as it can be seen at present China is great a generating brute growth in something that grossly resembles the industrial revolution of the XIX century, but so far, their currency is still not floating, the state in enormously interventionist and just one more detail: it is still a single party dictatorship which calls itself communist...

Doesn't it take more than brute growth to be allowed in the moderator's club?

El Toro Es Guapo

After the IMF: The injustice of the UN security council needs to be reformed.
These "permanent" members need to be eliminated.
What kind of dictatorial BS is this?
Who made these permanent members the moral guardians of the world.
Take a closer look and you will see that in the past 60 years the permanent members are responsible for (or have blindly supported) more aggression than the rest of the world.
Has the world gotten any safer, just or fair during this time.
I argue NO.


It is very simple choice: eachj country needs to be mesured by GPD with some other factors of this type. Then the ones to lose with no be the Europeans who represents around 26% of the World GDP by saoudi Arabia, Russia, India who are surepresented. The big winner will be China and Japan.

Aly-Khan Satchu

We certainly live in an accelerated World. It was not so long ago that I recall President Bush and his Cohorts talking of a Unipolar World like a Mantra.

The Bottom Line is that There are the Bankers to the World, who hold the Overdraft and there are those who depend upon their Kindness. And Until the Overdrawn find themselves in a position to Bank something, the Bankers hold them in thrall. All Credit to the US Administration in trying to jump ahead of this curve by at least playing graciously and trying to preempt the Accommodation the new Dispensation, because it is surely coming.

To try and sail against the Wind, is a very poor strategy. The Independent Fisk Story and the subsequent ramp up in the Dollar confirm that the New Bankers to the c21st World have yet to really flex their new muscle, the consequences of which are quite impossible to model.

We sit at a Tipping Point and the optimal peformance of the Markets [and they have been near optimal to date] depends on some Folk reading the writing on the Wall and sharpish.

Aly-Khan Satchu
Twitter alykhansatchu


Well aftermath of Economic crisis has shown that countries like India and China are set to mark their presence as worlds biggest Economies in the near future.One could not turn from the fact that India and China have emerged as a powerful economy at the time crisis had sabotaged many rich countries and on America it is still prevailing.So,the percentge shift in voting n that to 7% must be there,contemplating on the fact that India and china alone contributed to three-fifth of the global economy and it is judicious to do ASAP because inevitible can't remit to a longer time.


hello. i agree about controlling politics with the G20. China & India are not what in principle is the major corruption. dictator run developing countries clamoring to buy membership: to rape and pillage funds, with solicitous lies, are unchecked. fraud, waste, and corruption has to be regulated to determine the monies go, for what they are intended; and not just a gratuitous portion: for public relations or banking fraud. the politics need to address human rights beside economic development, and the monies need accountability. nobody wants the global dollars in the hands of a few despots amassing their own wealth.


Bravo Turks!
WB & IMF are two the club of riches.These parasite institutions were established to destroy the economic back bone of the developing countries.They are responsile for the economic downfall of South East Asia in mid 90s which was boldly detected by Mahatir Mohammad of Malaysia,they have destroyed the Jute and Tea industries of Bangladesh.In the name of aid they are the #1 sponsor and distributor of major corruptions in the whole world.
Readers are requested to share their experiences.


Everyone wants to play but no one wants to pay. China and India and anyone else for that matter needs to step up on the investment side of this. Giving them control of other peoples money is lame. Votes should be based on percentage of investment into the fund. Those that want or can't invest get no vote. This should be seen for what it is - charity. You don't get to demand charity.

Kewal Khanna

The globalised economy and GDP growth of countries like India and China has necessiated for a change in voting strength of WB and IMF. At the G20 Summit at Pittsburgh it has been realised by the rich countries to accept the importance of these countries in the world economy, replacing G7 by G20. Though there is a initial reluctance on the part of rich countries to broke in more voting rtights at World Bank and International Monetary Fund, but it appears to be written on the walls that can be delayed not ignored.Time has come to give weightage to India and China in the world financial institutions.


Who are they trying to fool? India failed in its pro-poor policies for years not because it was underrepresented at the World Bank but because it was over-politicized at home, with NO representation of the poor at Indian institutions. The regimes of China, India do not represent the poor any more than the regimes of rich countries represent poor countries. So the new moves are really motivated by egos of the over-represented in their own systzems, who now want to go global.
Will this do any good for the world's poor people? Well, let's look at evidence: has anyone heard of an Indian Marshall plan for South Asia, let alone an Indian contribution to anybody or anything outside India? Moyo suggests that it is time to abolish aid, and maybe the politics of non-donor countries pushing to get a seat is the best way to kill the Bretton Woods institutions. They are neither very effective nor very efficient, but death by corruption and intrigue is what awaits them if the current contenders get the upper hand.


Literally the IMF has the following objective:

The question I make myself is: How much global monetary cooperation, and secure financial stability has produced?

Is a system based on quotas that determine the SDR (Special Drawing Rights) assigned, which at its turn define the voting within the Organization, can comply with its mission and objectives? Can this be called a democratic Institution?.

Let's recall that the SDRs were created to safe what was inevitable,and that was, that the USA were no longer in a financial position to honor what was agreed in Bretton Woods:exchange 1 troy ounce of gold for the amount of 35 dollars. But the Financial engineers raised the fixed exchange rate to 38, and 42 until the total collapse, came in 1973 When President Nixon in a World Statement said that The USA will no longer honor Its compromise with the fixed exchange.

All financial schemes to increase the members quotas are just just delaying to confront the structural problem of the Capitalist System, and these bizarre debates about quotas are taking us nowhere. The Capitalist system must be rethink from their grounds,given emphasis on the ethical values it has and its parents wanted to promote, which was wealth for everyone and not for a few.

Fernando Guzmán Cavero


nice title! strip of politics, let’s talk about money and votes.

the world bank and the IMF are financial institutions, like all financial institutions, they need capital. a fair voting mechanism should be based on GDP and capital contributions. the difference between a permanent seat in the IMF and a permanent seat in the UN security council is, a permanent seat in the IMF is not a free privilege, you pay for it, and it doesn't come cheap, according to the current plan, they may increase the total capital in the IMF/world bank to one trillion dollars, a 10% voting share corresponds to 100 billion dollars' capital contribution, not everyone wants to do that.

nowadays the IMF and the world bank serve as firefighters, rescue this country, bail out that country, their capital doesn't generate good return. so some may find the "clout" is not worth the price tag, hence we may set up an auction platform, those who are unwilling to contribute may sell their quota to the highest bidder.

the established or the entrenched party likes to hold to its voting power by introducing leverage from the wall street, issue debt to finance the IMF and the world bank. nobody is a fool, this kind of "you pay, I vote" is not going anywhere.


The question of Voting power is a secondary issue. let Economist make an independent study of the purpose for which World Bank and IMF were established and and examine how far they have succeeded in achieving those objectives and the reasons for shortcomings and whether the changing scenario calls for review of the Goals set decades ago.
It is also worth examining whether the method of selection/appointment of the Chief Executives of these Institutions needs a review. and whether there is a system of external control to ensure independence of functioning.


According to all accounts,trillions of Dollars of Money is stacked in Swiss banks by those indulging in illegal transactions. It will be a great blessing if these prime world institutions can find some way in which the illegal practices can be stopped and Swiss Administartion is forced to repeal the Law that gives the Swiss banks an undesirable power of secrecy that stands in the way of exposure of hidden accounts

Thomas Bayes

Politics is the art and science of arrest, and emancipation: arrest the false short cut taking that saves whom steps, but makes more steps for others, and thereby us all, and emancipate the true short cuts, that save whom steps, without making more steps for others.

The ultimate emancipation? La (No)... 100% independence combined with il (small) the ability to stand with (any, and/or every), ergo, La il aha: No small gods...

...il (small) la (no) Allah (one God) - Godness is the ultimate emancipation, ergo why religion plays such a prime role in current arrests and emancipations.

"Because you, God, create yourself, but you also create you, Alameen, and you, Alameen are [Thn]...

Our problem is who fails to integrate whose self into the highest chain of command ant thus whose 'commander in chief" is less than 'God' so we get less than "a more perfect Union".

Our job is to diagnose, heal, perfect, protect, and promote, one and all, to accept the proposition that "If you can prove it is the will of God, then I will agree, obey, and participate within the range of degrees the proof requires and permits.

xref: Permitted, required, and impossible.

Ergo: *Six impossible things before breakfast*

xref: "Math can tell you what's impossible,"

So, read, "Who, or why does not need any, but who creates, sustains, welcomes, perfects, returns, and invites," for 'God', realize the invisible hands of the market approximate "not needing" any particular individual, yet there still is a need...

then meet the Sovereign. [tn] who owns all within whose domain and needs only "We the people"... and fewer and fewer of us, as the current unemployment rates show...

So from surfing the economic waves of supply and demand, you are now crawling out on to the dry land of Sovereign Authority, of which your legal tender, careful how you touch it, count carefully, are transferable receipts of Sovereign Authority...

So would you like to do this with, or without me, increase the sovereign authority of the nations of the world, and diagnose and heal those who are skilled at getting themselves elected, to be equally skilled at exercising sovereign authority: taking, giving, controlling (arresting), liberating (emancipating), educating, and governing (xref: armatures that keep the rate of revolution constant despite varying torques of phases of learning curves)

And Maintaining ... Penelope being 'raped' by Ulysses friends until Ulysses, the sovereign, returns home and restores order.


“We are into the world of politics”, said the World Bank’s president, Robert Zoellick.....

The World Bank has always been in the world of politics and political spinning. And Mr. Zoellick, like all his predecessors, is a political creature.

The bank's development mantra and recipe for success keeps shifting because of (a) shifting priorities of its principle sovereign shareholders and (b) the necessity of the world bank bureaucrats to distract attention from the pervasive failure of the bank's loans and advise.

The World Bank expert advise has rarely been on target or relevant. Throughout its history the bank has been singularly unsuccessful in anticipating or predicting key events and developments in the world economy or in individual member countries.

There is no way to judge the quality of its loans. Repayments are guaranteed by sovereigns irrespective of the quality of the projects, the robustness and honesty of policy advise and assessment of outcomes. The evaluation methods used by the Bank to judge economic benefits under its projects are poor and non-transparent. Lending at any point of time reflects the political and populist naive flavor of that time rather than any informed analysis and diagnosis.

Given this; taxpayers in both developing and developed countries should resist any capital increase for the World Bank. It is time that this institution was put out to pasture.


Time to give India, China, Saudi Arabia and other important countries outside the West more power.


It seems to me that the article misses the point: the world is changing, and changing fast. One would have thought that the sensible thing for multilateral institutions would be to adapt accordingly. The other possible outcome might be that those institutions that do not adapt would become irrelevant, and the world would continue without them.

It seems presumptuous that the shifting values of Europe would always reign supreme, from white man's burden of times past to selective application of justice and human rights today. One suspects that Europe and its off shoots may have little option but to "retool" to live with "others" in a situation of mutual respect.


What The Economist missed in istanbul was the release there by the Group of 30 of a Report on Reform of the IMF.

Calling for IMF governance and surveillance reforms the Report stated that national governments need to seize the opportunity of the economic and financial crisis to modernize the operations of the Fund. In calling for far-reaching, comprehensive reforms of the
IMF, the G30 warned that as the immediate severe effects of the financial crisis begin to wane, the
impetus for real, substantive and long-lasting reform of this key international financial institution may
diminish and begin to stall.

G30 Chairman and CEO Jacob Frenkel said, “The IMF is an enormously important institution at
the center of the global financial system. The G30 report aims to enhance the effectiveness of IMF advice
to governments on their economic policies, strengthen its authority and ensure it has the capability to
mobilize the actions necessary to avoid crises and mitigate systemic vulnerabilities. Reform is necessary
and timely.”

For more on the Report visit the Group of Thirty on the web



Latest blog posts - All times are GMT
Writing worth reading: Dark matter
Babbage March 15th, 14:43
Bits and mortar: Babbage visits Ada's
Babbage March 15th, 10:22
Deportations: A kinder expulsion
Democracy in America March 14th, 21:38
Blasphemy laws: Wrong on so many levels
Erasmus March 14th, 17:20


Products & events