Im on top of the world!

or that was what I felt like, while sitting in the highest building in Vietnam:
Bitexco. It is an iconic skyscraper in Ho Chi Minh city. Bitexco is also the name of the
company building it.

It was a weird feeling. On one hand, I felt a supreme power looking over million tiny
motorbikes getting caught in traffic jam. On the other hand, knowing that I owned
that feeling to Bitexco ached my heart.

Came the bad news. Bitexco just won a $757 million highway project backed by the
World Bank in Vietnam's first-ever public-private partnership. It was an easy win
where there is no tender or bidding for the project. Why? I know Bitexco. It is a firm
short on capital with a background in textiles, property and bottling water. It is a
political-color private company with strong ties to the government. It was selected
without competition to build a 100-km highway from Ho Chi Minh City to the coastal
city of Phan Thiet.

The World Bank has granted a low-interest loans for the road project. Its support for
a no-bid contract has set a bad precedent for a country with a previous reputation
for entrenched graft, bureaucracy and vested interests. The support was described
by World Bank as an innovate approach to embrace private sector participation in
development while ensuring safeguards remain in place.

The project has not been constructed yet, but the negative impact on politics and
foreign investment arrived obviously. NGOs and investor were not impressed. 1

"The bank's desire is in the right place, said Jessica Evans, a senior advocate with
Human Rights Watch in Washington. But unfortunately we just don't have the
stringent mechanisms in place to ensure that there is the level of due diligence that
is required, particularly for human rights."

"I'm very disappointed," said a Japanese investor. "I expected the government
would open this up with a fair chance for all private companies."

"The Vietnamese government is ruining its last chance to gain the trust of foreign
investors," said the head of a foreign business chamber in Ho Chi Minh City. "To me,
this look more like a donor-crony partnership than a public-private partnership."

1 Not so fast: critics question Vietnam road project, World Bank,

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-vietnam-infrastucture-idUKBRE9AD1DE20131115
Such impacts could be avoided. World Bank could have instead fostered a fair
culture by supporting a fair competitive bidding in the road project. But, famous for
its foggy transparency, it chose to align with a shady communism government to
give special benefits to political connection private companies. It came as no
surprise though, as loans to communist governments have been the fastest-
growing part of the banks portfolio in the 1980s. An aid agency desperate to find
new recipients has found a gold mine in the worst-managed economies in the
world.2

I do not believe that international financial institution such as World Bank could
consistently provide assistance in an objective, unbiased and responsible manner.
World Bank, started with the highest ideals 40 years ago, is now does more harm
than good for the worlds poorest. It is helping Third World governments cripple
their economies, maul their environments, and oppress their people.

Why? Because the bank now exists to maximize the transfer of resources to Third
World governments instead of developing them. Giving countries money that will be
badly used is worse than not giving them any money at all. Empowering corrupt
politicians to rule over their people is not real development. Therefore, most of the
long-term aid recipients have only ended up with heavy debt loads, swollen public
sectors, and overvalued exchange rates.

The possible way, and it might sound counter-intuitive, first is giving less money to
World Bank. A poorer bank would manage its money more carefully, and increase
the effect on positive development. The second is giving money directly to the
private-sector, which is the major driving force in any countrys economy, instead of
passing through the ineffective and likely corrupted government-layer.

2 The World Bank Vs. the World Poor, James Bovard,

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa092.html
Consider the goals and the criticisms of the IMF and the World Bank. Do you feel that their
practices are required for accountability purposes, or do you believe that they unfairly
threaten the sovereignty of certain nations? Justify and explain your opinion. Your
response should be a minimum of 300 words.

The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank were created in 1944. Their goals are to
promote international economic cooperation, by providing short-term loans to their member
countries to trade with other countries. They are one of the most powerful yet most criticized
institutions on Earth, due to their shadow-style practices which is considered inefficient,
immoral, and against human rights.

Few knows how they work.

What I have known is, since the 1980s debt crisis, the IMF and World Bank have acted like a
global loan shark. Global Exchange explained: Their loan packages are tied to certain
conditions, which is called structural adjustment policies (SAPs). Borrowing countries have to
follow SAPs to get loans, international assistance, and debt relief; in exchange, the IMF decides
how much debtor countries can spend on education, health care, and environmental protection.3

In other words, they use money to take control of poor countries. Here are my three reasons to
oppose the IMF.

1. The IMF serves the wealthy countries only

One dollar equals one vote in the IMF. Their voting power is determined by the amount of
money that each country pays into the IMF's quota system. So the IMF serves the interest of
bankers, investors and corporations from wealthy countries first, and poor countries last.

2. The IMF has increased immoral and unequal system against the poor countries

If you lend money to someone, how can you make sure they will pay back? IMF has the SAPs,
which ensure debt repayment by requiring countries to cut spending on education, health, basic
food, transportation, subsidies. As a result, this increases poverty, reduce domestic economies
and allow multinational corporations to exploit workers and the environment 4

3. Their secretive method has no accountability

3 Global Exchange, Top Ten Reasons to Oppose the IMF. Retrieved from
http://www.globalexchange.org/resources/wbimf/oppose
What is their culture? Secretive.5

The IMF is funded with taxpayer money, yet it operates behind a veil of secrecy. The IMF works
with a select group of central bankers and finance ministers to make polices without input from
other government agencies such as health, education and environment departments. Many
economist has said the IMF tightening government spending and hiking interest rates is
wrong6.

Who caused the most recent global recession? You guess it right, the IMF.

4 Films for the Humanities & Sciences, International Monetary Fund (Video file)
(2013). Retrieved from http://fod.infobase.com/p_ViewPlaylist.aspx?
AssignmentID=LC4NG7

5 Journeyman Pictures, IMF Blamed for Financial Collapse (Video file) (1998).
Retrieved from http://fod.infobase.com/p_ViewPlaylist.aspx?AssignmentID=LC4NG7

6 Journeyman Pictures, Economist Questions IMF's Methods (Video file) (1998).

Retrieved from http://fod.infobase.com/p_ViewPlaylist.aspx?AssignmentID=LC4NG7