Published on Global Research.ca, by Raúl de Sagastizabal, October 12, 2011.
The IMF Independent Evaluation Office IEO published on February last their IMF Performance in the Run-Up to the Financial and Economic Crisis, which gives an account of the Fund’s “cultures.”
Generally, audit or evaluation reports of international organizations, internal or quasi-internal, act as validation for the organization’s mistakes and have no practical consequences.
Such reports let us know that the organization has done this or that wrong, or that it was unable to assess the result of a five-year loan period owing to a lack of the relevant indicators, or that a certain policy or practice did not yield the expected results.
Nothing is said about who is accountable for mistakes done. And, once this self-criticism is published, it is assumed that the organization has made a public acknowledgement of its mistakes, the press has taken note, absolution has been given and nothing more needs be done … //
… Summing up, the IEO holds the view that the Fund lacks analytical capability, does not correctly assess risks, their officers do not admit contrary opinions, they impose their points of view on the authorities of developing countries but fear expressing them before the ones from developed nations.
The IMF has internal governance problems and “long-standing” organizational ones, and not only did it not alert countries early on the possible risks of the financial system, but, on the contrary, told them for long months that the perspectives were good, that the system was working well and would withstand the American housing bubble and other disturbances, and that the outlook was the best in years for Europe; ultimately, it told them there would be no crisis, neither local nor global, and that there was nothing to worry about.
If we rigorously stick to these conclusions, each and every one of the recommendations the Fund has formulated to the nations along the history, as well as each and every one of its adjustment programs should be placed under judgment.
Such conclusions might as well be used as evidence by the Asian countries to hold the Fund accountable for their fatal advices during their time of crisis, from which only Malaysia come out unscathed, by firmly opposing the application of the Fund’s programs; or Argentina, for the Fund’s performance before, during, and after the 2001 fall, which determined the most devastating crisis the country has any memory of.
The Fund on its part does not hold on to its flawed conclusions anymore; after getting it wrong again and again and issuing forecasts, which announced good prospects of world recovery, their experts now recognize that they did not “perceive” what was really going on, and warn that the world is entering the danger zone and to avoid it advice the developed nations to apply the same adjustment programs which devastated for decades the developing world.
It would be a surprise indeed if, after so many blunders, anyone would pay serious attention to the IMF. Nonetheless, ignoring it is not advisable either. The governments would do well to ask themselves whether the time has not come to withdraw their endorsement to the organization. (full long text).
(Later, my comment: I am still stunned how we can accept all these explanations about errors, mistakes etc. served by the FED-IWF-Bankster Clique. It is obvious that all this was produced intentionally. Their goal: disturbed anxious people battling for their survival and indebted, crashing nations can be easier manipulated by a small oligarchy. Any question?).
What is Hot Money? by Raul de Sagastizabal on August 23, 2011;
IMF: Economic crisis to cost $4 trillion, by GlobalCrisisNews.com on April 22, 2009;
Empower Yourself to Fight the Power, on Global Research.ca, by Global Research, Oct. 10, 2011.