EU attacks Wolfowitz

Though it is certainly none of their business and underscores the pretextual nature of the risible claim of impropriety raised against him, the EU Parliament has called for Wolfowitz to resign as President of the World Bank.
"By digging in his heels and refusing to resign as President of the World Bank, Wolfowitz is dragging the whole organization into disrepute and further undermining the credibility of its anti-corruption policy," said Caroline Lucas, a British member of the Greens.

"If he won't jump himself, he must be pushed."
EU Referendum compares Wolfowitz' conduct and the EU reaction with the clearly improper conduct of EU Commissioner Verheugen as to which not a word of censure was raised by that august body.


The same people who have huffed and puffed about Verheugen, his professional achievements and the need for privacy, are demanding that Paul Wolfowitz resign, whether his is guilty of inappropriate behaviour or not, in order to restore the World Bank's good name (in itself something of a joke).

Even the European Parliament (called completely incorrectly by
Reuters and others "the European Union's legislature") has voted 332 votes to 251 to call for Wolfowitz's resignation, though this is not, in any sense of the word, their concern.

Apparently, the resignation is necessary in order not to undermine the World Bank's anti-corruption policy. The trouble is that it is the anti-corruption policy that has brought about the President's problems.

Though it is certainly none of their business and underscores the pretextual nature of the risible claim of impropriety raised against him, the EU Parliament has called for Wolfowitz to resign as President of the World Bank.
"By digging in his heels and refusing to resign as President of the World Bank, Wolfowitz is dragging the whole organization into disrepute and further undermining the credibility of its anti-corruption policy," said Caroline Lucas, a British member of the Greens.

"If he won't jump himself, he must be pushed."
EU Referendum compares Wolfowitz' conduct and the EU reaction with the clearly improper conduct of EU Commissioner Verheugen as to which not a word of censure was raised by that august body.


The same people who have huffed and puffed about Verheugen, his professional achievements and the need for privacy, are demanding that Paul Wolfowitz resign, whether his is guilty of inappropriate behaviour or not, in order to restore the World Bank's good name (in itself something of a joke).

Even the European Parliament (called completely incorrectly by
Reuters and others "the European Union's legislature") has voted 332 votes to 251 to call for Wolfowitz's resignation, though this is not, in any sense of the word, their concern.

Apparently, the resignation is necessary in order not to undermine the World Bank's anti-corruption policy. The trouble is that it is the anti-corruption policy that has brought about the President's problems.