From the New York Times
Less than two weeks ago, the International Monetary Fund’s executive board, its highest authority, assessed a North African country’s economy and commended its government for its “ambitious reform agenda.” The I.M.F. also welcomed its “strong macroeconomic performance and the progress on enhancing the role of the private sector,” and “encouraged” the authorities to continue on that promising path. That country was Libya.
Tunisia was hailed last September for its “wide-ranging structural reforms” and “prudent macroeconomic management.”
Bahrain was credited in December with a “favorable near-term outlook” after the economy “managed the global crisis well.”
Algeria’s “prudent macroeconomic policies” helped it to “build a sound financial position with a very low level of debt.”
Concerning Egypt, the I.M.F. directors last April praised the authorities’ response to the crisis as well as their “sound macroeconomic management.”
The I.M.F. was short-sighted. The macroeconomic numbers and the indicators that the fund’s envoys examined were genuine. They simply failed to assess whether reforms, structural or not, could be sustained in countries ruled by potentates without legitimate democratic mandates. The fund’s omitted to check whether the reform agendas were based on any kind of popular support. The I.M.F. might want to add another box to check on its list of criteria: democratic support
No comments:
Post a Comment