Robert Zoelick is nominated to replace Wolfowitz at the World Bank. Not bad.
The Financial Times cites a "senior World Bank manager" who "said there would be mixed feelings about Mr Zoellick’s nomination, with respect for his diplomatic skills offset by
concern about his hard-driving management style. The manager said MrZoellick was “highly regarded” but seen as a “bit abrasive” with his staff."
You ask me, a "bit abrasive" isn't bad, especially around the club we call the World Bank.
Blake Hounshell at the Foreign Policy blog is downright ephusive:
The Financial Times cites a "senior World Bank manager" who "said there would be mixed feelings about Mr Zoellick’s nomination, with respect for his diplomatic skills offset by
concern about his hard-driving management style. The manager said MrZoellick was “highly regarded” but seen as a “bit abrasive” with his staff."
You ask me, a "bit abrasive" isn't bad, especially around the club we call the World Bank.
Blake Hounshell at the Foreign Policy blog is downright ephusive:
It's true that Zoellick made little headway on Darfur or Doha, butI wonder how this one slipped through the vetting process. Condi, did you push it?
these are herculean challenges that require sustained presidential
engagement. (After all, the cossacks work for the Tsar.) On China
policy, Zoellick made a hugely positive impact as a thoughtful
counterweight to Pentagon hawks. His September 2005 remarks
to the National Committee on United States-China relations were the
most insightful comments made by any Bush official over the past six
years.
No comments:
Post a Comment