& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

News commentary

Rich nations face criticisms in IMF-World Bank meet

From M Syeduzzaman, Guest Columnist from Washington
For the first time in many years. Industrialised countries have been openly criticised by the leadership of the World Bank and the IMF for their failure to provide adequate real resources to developing na tlons.
This criticism serves as one of the central points in the de liberations of the Just-con eluded IMF World Bank meet Ing tn the US capital.
The Industrialised nations were also told by the heads of the tv«u organisations that they, were not fulfilling their oblign Hons In stimulating world economic recovery or in speeding up the conclusion of the Uruguay Round.
This concern for developing countries in the World Bank came Into a sharp focus when Its president Lewis Preston urged the industrialised nations to create a favourable external environment for the Third World states to pursue their reforms to reduce
poverty
For this writer who had the !7th opportunity to attend the annual meetings of these two organisations, nnd the third In a non-official capacity, this particular meeting was certainly one with a difference.
with a number of distinguishing features.
For one thing, coming as It did against the backdrop of the currency crisis In the West, differences over the ex change rates between the United Kingdom and Germany and clashes of viewpoints over European Integration, the meeting felt the tension, with shadows of uncertainties cast over Its deliberations.
However, what impressed one most was the concern the meeting showed for the global scene, especially for the developing nations, Instead of confining Its attention to the West. Indeed, the Industrialised countries came In ’ for criticisms on many issues, espe dally for avoiding their obllga Hons In maintaining the orderly currency markets. This Smand came from none than Michael Camdessus, the Managing Director of the IMF. He did not also miss the opportunity of reminding them of the need to co-operate with the IMF on the exchange rate issue, which they had not apparently done
When the heads of the two organisations took up the cause of the developing world, their message was clear and. at times, strong.
They both urged upon the industrialised West and Japan to be mindful of the Impact of their national and international policies on the eco nomic destinies of Third World nations.
In this context, officials of the World Bank showed their concern of the adverse impact of the upheaval of the currency crisis on developing countries. Some fears were also expressed that the
changing exchange rates would reduce the funds available under the 10th IDA replenishment.
Yet another surprise was that a large number of Finance Ministers expressed themselves strongly In favour of "an appropriate mix" of public and private sector roles In economic reforms and structural changes. This was In sharp contrast to the almost unanl mous voice for fast dlsman tling of the public sector heard In recent meetings.
As the curtain came down on what many of us regarded as a "meeting with a difference". all eyes scanned the horizon and studied the future prospects.
Will the Industrialised countries listen to the warn Ings from these two organisa tions and will both the IMF and the World Bank maintain the pressure on the West and Japan to take a truly global view of problems and challenges which He ahead ? Answers are yet to come to these questions.
(Detail report on the IMF -World Bank meeting- Page 4)