High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e9452230-780a-11e1-b237-00144feab49a.html#ixzz1qOM76tos

Every now and then something crystallises how rapidly the world is changing. Last week’s nomination by President Barack Obama of Jim Yong Kim as the next president of the World Bank presents one such moment. The story ought to proceed by tradition – a US president chooses an American for the top job and the other big shareholders fall into line. The chances are that the gentleman’s agreement will be upheld: the Europeans have even more to lose than the US by ending their duopoly over Bretton Woods (France – oops, Europe – gets to appoint the head of the IMF). It would take an unlikely rupture to embolden the Europeans to vote against Dr Kim’s candidacy next month.

What could possibly go wrong? Very little, which is precisely the problem. Were the process genuinely meritocratic – if the World Bank board was required to find the best-qualified candidate for the job – Dr Kim would be unlikely to find himself on a shortlist of three. In contrast, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, the only African in the running, would be among anyone’s top picks. But the process doesn’t work like that. In spite of Mr Obama’s internationalist aspirations, fear of a domestic backlash clearly weighed even heavier on his mind. Here are three reasons why he should open up the process and release Europe from its pledge.

High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e9452230-780a-11e1-b237-00144feab49a.html#ixzz1qOMDKYnd

First, it is in America’s national interest to do so. Not only should the US support meritocracy, as its national creed demands, it should be conspicuously seen to support that principle where it matters. Washington needs to reboot the World Bank’s legitimacy and relevance in the eyes of the poorest countries, which are increasingly turning to China and the private markets for investment and capital. If it continues to appear to be a preserve of the old rich club, the emerging world will continue to look elsewhere. By upholding tradition, the US will only cede more influence.

Second, by America’s own criteria, it should cast its vote for Ms Okonjo-Iweala. According to the guidelines, which were updated by the US and its partners last year, the ideal candidate should have run a big organisation and possess extensive diplomatic and multilateral experience. As Nigeria’s finance minister for the second time, having once been its foreign minister, Ms Okonjo-Iweala’s résumé is strong. She has also been a World Bank managing director – in effect a deputy to Bob Zoellick, the outgoing president – and knows the institution inside out. Dr Kim is an admirable individual. In addition to running Dartmouth College, he set up a highly reputed healthcare non-governmental organisation, and also headed the World Health Organisation’s Aids programme. But he has never run a big organisation, let alone taken on corruption in a developing country such as Nigeria, as Ms Okonjo-Iweala has. He would also sorely lack her global Rolodex, which would be vital in helping persuade the bank’s stakeholders around the world to reshape its mission.

Third, the World Bank needs a leader who can stop it from slipping into irrelevance. Dr Kim’s nomination was heavily influenced by Hillary Clinton, who rightly admires his grassroots work on Aids and other diseases. Of course it is critically important to fight them. But disease does not spread in a vacuum. Development is a complicated business. Yet healthcare is the prism through which Washington increasingly approaches it. Consider this: the US pledged $4.1bn for the latest replenishment of the International Development Association, the World Bank’s soft-loan arm for the poorest countries. It pledged almost exactly the same amount – $4bn – to the Global Fund to fight Aids, Tuberculosis and Malaria. Putting a healthcare specialist in charge of the World Bank would reinforce America’s focus on what some in the developing world dismiss as “the fashionable diseases”. It is the unfashionable illnesses, such as diarrhoea, that claim the most lives.

Much has changed since Mr Zoellick was appointed to the job in 2007. While the west has talked about a world recession, China’s per capita income has risen by 43 per cent, according to The Globalist. In those four years African incomes have grown by almost double digits, while Nigeria’s annual growth rate has hit an average of almost 7 per cent. The relative weight of the global economy is shifting. But its economic institutions remain frozen in time. In many ways Mr Obama represents a new page in America’s story. Yet he is also a paradox. History may record him as the last US president able to preserve the way things used to be done. There is still time in this – and future – moments for Mr Obama to take a more expansive view of what would best serve America’s interests.

What ever the case, Obama cannot vote for NOI.
He is black! It would look RACICALLY- MOTIVATED TO THE WORLD.
Just politics!

Then again. . .she is FEMALE!

2 strikes! OUT!!!!

Then again she is AFRICAN!

3 strikes! OUT!!!

Not really,obama just dont like okoro.

inferiority complex

~Bluetooth:

Not really,obama just dont like okoro.

~Bluetooth:

Not really,obama just dont like okoro.

Bluetooth you no go change? kai