Wolfowitz: Return to Sender? 
 
by Bill Berkowitz 
Recently forced out as president of the World Bank, Paul Wolfowitz, one of
the primary architects of U.S. President George W. Bush's Iraq war, is
heading back to familiar surroundings. And the Washington-based American
Enterprise Institute (AEI), one of the United States' premier conservative
think-tanks, is more than pleased to welcome him back.

Earlier this month, AEI President Christopher DeMuth announced that
Wolfowitz would be coming on board as a visiting scholar to work on such
issues as international economic development, Africa, and public-private
partnerships. Wolfowitz told the Financial Times that he would be
"explor[ing] some ways to help advance development in Africa, both through
the private sector and through foundation work." 

Prior to joining the Pentagon in 2001, Wolfowitz served as a member of
AEI's Council of Academic Advisers. 

After leaving his post as deputy secretary of defense with the Bush
administration, the World Bank position appeared to be the perfect fit for
Wolfowitz; a place to rehabilitate a reputation badly damaged by his
serial misjudgments over developments in Iraq. 

However, nearly midway through his term at the World Bank, things started
to unravel as evidence mounted about Wolfowitz's ethical lapses. His
efforts to get his girlfriend (a bank employee) promoted, charges that he
was a poor manager, and a growing concern among member countries that he
was using the bank to advance U.S. interests fueled the fire. 

As Graydon Carter, editor of Vanity Fair magazine, pointed out in his June
"Editor's Letter" (written prior to Wolfowitz's World Bank exit strategy),
things had gotten so bad for Wolfowitz that he had become "a source of
ridicule within the international organization that employees have
published a satirical monograph called 'La Banca Swirlla' ('Bank
Swirled')." 

According to RightWeb, a project of the International Relations Center,
Wolfowitz received mixed reviews for his work at the World Bank. On the
plus side, "He badgered the United States and other wealthy countries to
cut subsidies to aid development in poorer countries, fervently pursued
anti-corruption policies, and announced moves aimed at strengthening the
bank's internal watchdog, the Department of Institutional Integrity." 

Critics, however, were quick to point to the fact that Wolfowitz, a
controversial choice to begin with because of his involvement with the
Iraq War, exacerbated the controversy by choosing to bring on board "close
associates and supporters" of the Bush administration's "war on terror."
The case for dumping Wolfowitz was likely sealed earlier this year when it
was revealed that he was deeply involved in getting a pay raise and a new
job at the State Department for his girlfriend, Shaha Riza, a career bank
staffer. 

Wolfowitz is familiar with the world of conservative think tanks and
public policy institutes. In addition to his previous AEI work, he was a
paid speaker for the Heritage Foundation and the Hudson Institute. He was
also an original signatory with William Kristol's Project for the New
American Century. 

Despite his dismal performance within the administration and his
questionable activities at the World Bank, Wolfowitz has been welcomed
back into the fold. And, unlike other Bush administration employees – such
as FEMA's Michael Brown, who was forced to resign after his incompetent
handling of Hurricane Katrina; or Vice President Dick Cheney's top aide
Lewis "Scooter" Libby, who will be forever linked with the outing of a CIA
operative, a subsequent conviction for perjury and obstructing justice,
and a presidential commutation; or former Interior Deputy Secretary J.
Steven Griles, who was convicted, and recently sentenced to jail time, for
withholding information from the Senate Indian Affairs Committee in 2005
about his meeting with Republican Party über-lobbyist, now imprisoned,
Jack Abramoff – Wolfowitz is once again in a position to influence public
policy. 

During the early part of its more than 30-year existence, the conservative
AEI was seen as "a mainstream economic policy and political science think
tank." A number of respected centrist analysts still at the institute,
such as William Schneider and Norman Ornstein, still "embody that old
style," Benjamin Wallace-Wells wrote in a December 2003 piece in the
Washington Monthly. 

In the early 1980s, AEI was no match for the Heritage Foundation, a
younger, Washington-based think tank steeped in hard-core conservative
politics. The Heritage Foundation combined a capacity to raise significant
amounts of money from other conservative foundations with a voracious
appetite for publicity. It was able to raise its institutional profile
through its unceasing communications with both right-wing and mainstream
media sources. 

After DeMuth took over the AEI's reins in 1986, the organization"put in
place an astonishingly successful formula for attracting money and
garnering influence, which has matched the increasingly aggressive style
of Washington's conservative community," Wallace-Wells pointed out. 

DeMuth hired the godfather of neoconservatism, Irving Kristol, and the
late Jeane Kirkpatrick, who was Ronald Reagan's foreign policy adviser in
his 1980 campaign and who had become the first woman to serve as the U.S.
ambassador to the United Nations. 

From her position as an AEI fellow, Kirkpatrick promoted the policies
pushed by the Project for the New American Century, described by RightWeb
as "a letterhead group" based in the same office building as AEI and
headed by several neoconservative notables, including Irving Kristol's son
William. Both before and after the 9/11 attacks, PNAC played an aggressive
role encouraging the Bush administration to invade Iraq. 

Several other Iraq war architects have also been connected to AEI,
including Richard Perle, Cheney, former U.S. ambassador to the United
Nations John Bolton, and former undersecretary of defense for policy
Douglas Feith. 

In February 2003, President Bush delivered a major policy speech to AEI,
mapping out his war plan, "thanking them [AEI] for their service" and
support for the invasion. It is not, however, a question of that was then
and this is now. AEI's influence within the administration persists to
this day. 

According to Think Progress, a project of the Center for American Progress
Action Fund, Bush's escalation plan is largely based on a November 2006
paper by AEI analyst Frederick Kagan, who argued that the U.S. should
"reenter [Iraq] in large numbers." 

In his interview with the Financial Times, Wolfowitz indicated that he did
not think he was through with public service. "Twenty years ago I was
American ambassador to Indonesia, and I have to freely acknowledge,
because it is pretty much an open secret, that I fell in love with that
country," he said. He added that he "wouldn't mind working on some
countries like Indonesia and Turkey that I've had a long association
with." 

Given his miscalculations on Iraq and his sullied performance at the World
Bank, another Bush appointment would be a political resurrection for the
ages. 

(Inter Press Service)
 


-- 

questo articolo e` stato inviato via web dal servizio gratuito 
http://www.newsland.it/news segnala gli abusi ad abuse@newsland.it