It is perceived that IMF is changing ideology to be more pro-poor...
International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) diminishing
influence and funding notwithstanding, has been given a new and exciting opportunity by G-20 nations of rebuilding the emerging economies which are tattering under the shackles of recession. $750 billion will be pumped into IMF’s kitty to try and do that. The new Managing Director of IMF, Dominique Strauss Kahn is trying his best to restore its old glory by shifting its ideology that can satisfy even its hardest critic. It has certainly done so with Joseph Stighitz, a Nobel Laureate who had a long time antipathy for IMF’s policies, thus declaring the new polices as ‘welcome’ in Wall Street Journal. The criticism was particularly sharp for inveterate IMF’s policies of imposing conditions against granting loans. So much so, that it often used to instruct governments to cut-back on public spending as a pre-requisite for granting loans. This kind of dealings with fragile Third World economies has often proved to be its nemesis. East Asian crisis and Argentine collapse are the examples of IMF’s flawed policies based out of the US and Western Europe’s dictates.
The IMF’s present condition is rooted to its genesis since its inception in 1945 at Betton Woods Conference. Its main function then was to oversee the orderly balance of payment between countries, since there were fixed exchange rates at that time. But when Richard Nixon stopped dollars convertibility to gold, IMF’s role became less pertinent. However in 1980s the IMF found a new role for itself as a crisis-lending institution for developing countries. During this time IMF was also seen as a protagonist for US led free-market economy being imposed on frail under developed countries. However, the “Washington Consensus” as it was called, is under fire – because its prescriptive has crippled many economies causing major social and economic distress. The recession has cut the deepest among developing with IMF predicting that another 85 million people will further loose their jobs world wide in 2009.
Civil society organisations are concerned about developed countries’ lack of empathy towards their poor cousins who are languishing in miseries and have called for immediate increased aid and debt relief. There is no doubt that IMF is changing, as is acknowledged by Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of the UK, when he stated “Laissez-faire has had its day”. Lately, IMF has advocated deficit spending and monetary easing. Although it is true that IMF has disposed of laissez-faire ideology, it is not clear what kind of economic policy will it espouse? It was Keynesian world when IMF came into being, with fixed exchange rates and fiscal intervention. After this system subsided in 1970s, IMF embraced free market philosophy, and now a leftist idea has brought them back to Keynesianism. After 65 years of ups and downs, probably the time has come for the body to withdraw from its undemocratic, doctrine oriented body to a more accommodating financial organisation that will be beneficial to the majority of the world.
International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) diminishing
influence and funding notwithstanding, has been given a new and exciting opportunity by G-20 nations of rebuilding the emerging economies which are tattering under the shackles of recession. $750 billion will be pumped into IMF’s kitty to try and do that. The new Managing Director of IMF, Dominique Strauss Kahn is trying his best to restore its old glory by shifting its ideology that can satisfy even its hardest critic. It has certainly done so with Joseph Stighitz, a Nobel Laureate who had a long time antipathy for IMF’s policies, thus declaring the new polices as ‘welcome’ in Wall Street Journal. The criticism was particularly sharp for inveterate IMF’s policies of imposing conditions against granting loans. So much so, that it often used to instruct governments to cut-back on public spending as a pre-requisite for granting loans. This kind of dealings with fragile Third World economies has often proved to be its nemesis. East Asian crisis and Argentine collapse are the examples of IMF’s flawed policies based out of the US and Western Europe’s dictates.The IMF’s present condition is rooted to its genesis since its inception in 1945 at Betton Woods Conference. Its main function then was to oversee the orderly balance of payment between countries, since there were fixed exchange rates at that time. But when Richard Nixon stopped dollars convertibility to gold, IMF’s role became less pertinent. However in 1980s the IMF found a new role for itself as a crisis-lending institution for developing countries. During this time IMF was also seen as a protagonist for US led free-market economy being imposed on frail under developed countries. However, the “Washington Consensus” as it was called, is under fire – because its prescriptive has crippled many economies causing major social and economic distress. The recession has cut the deepest among developing with IMF predicting that another 85 million people will further loose their jobs world wide in 2009.
Civil society organisations are concerned about developed countries’ lack of empathy towards their poor cousins who are languishing in miseries and have called for immediate increased aid and debt relief. There is no doubt that IMF is changing, as is acknowledged by Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of the UK, when he stated “Laissez-faire has had its day”. Lately, IMF has advocated deficit spending and monetary easing. Although it is true that IMF has disposed of laissez-faire ideology, it is not clear what kind of economic policy will it espouse? It was Keynesian world when IMF came into being, with fixed exchange rates and fiscal intervention. After this system subsided in 1970s, IMF embraced free market philosophy, and now a leftist idea has brought them back to Keynesianism. After 65 years of ups and downs, probably the time has come for the body to withdraw from its undemocratic, doctrine oriented body to a more accommodating financial organisation that will be beneficial to the majority of the world.
difficult. Just a query about this “maker of sarees from banana fiber” is enough to get us specific directions, right down to the last turn. Tucked behind a few shops lies his dilapidated rented one-room factory-house and the only way to reach it is a narrow pathway with an open sewer running along. When we entered the asbestos-roofed room, Shekhar, the unconventional saree weaver was swinging cotton threads in a hand charkha.
a commission of inquiry to study the migration and polarisation of population on religious basis hasn’t gone down well with Gujarat’s human rights activists. They believe that Modi is preparing his communal agenda for the 2012 assembly elections.
Devi has not got a farthing by way of state assistance, Malik got immediate relief and Rs 3,000 stipend for 48 months, but no promised ‘seed’ money which could help him launch into something of an alternative career. Malik is, nonetheless, better placed than some of the others but that is because of his high ranking in the Maoist hierarchy. Lesser known figures who took the government’s offer at face value, are trying hard to organise their own protection and lead a normal existence.
business. There are over 460 large business houses having significant asset value in the country. Interestingly, most of them are controlled by women- a trend which is forcing companies to engage more women into the workplace. Researches show that there are 20,000 firms which account for around five per cent of all registered businesses today in Saudi Arabia, controlled or owned by businesswomen. Interestingly, membership of women in local commerce chambers is on the rise. For example, Jeddah Chamber has 2,000 women members out of a total of 50,000. The same can be seen in Riyadh where there are 2,400 women members out of 35,000 — showing a fourfold increase in just ten years. Business-women in the Eastern Province chamber has increased to 1,000 (out of 14,000). This gradual emergence of Saudi businesswomen forced the Government to revise its years-old labour laws and business proceedings and include women too. Many chambers also came out with centres to facilitate women. Jeddah Chamber of Commerce established Khadija Bint Khwailid Centre to guide and facilitate Saudi businesswomen.