IMF: A challenge from and for the BRICS

Share

The nationality of the technocrat who runs the International Monetary Fund should not matter much to anyone. But if the BRICS think it matters, then it matters. The deal by which the U.S. runs the World Bank and a European the IMF has long been an "obsolete unwritten convention," to borrow the words of the fund's executive directors from Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. Now that this is an issue, it will be far harder for the European succession to continue, whatever the merits of France's Christine Lagarde, who has declared her candidacy.

Countries in Africa or South America now have a practical alternative to the IMF. If they do not like the terms on offer, they can ask for funds from the likes of China. Politically, this might be a more palatable alternative for leaders under stress.

Along with its European leadership, the IMF's brand is under challenge. The fund is understandably still unpopular in south-east Asia for the aggressive stance it took over the 1997 crisis under Frenchman Michel Camdessus. Another French leader now could further undermine the fund's moral authority.

However, it is much easier for the BRICS to unite in opposition than to coalesce around a positive agenda. Rivalries among the BRIC countries mean they may be more likely to agree on candidate from none of them (in much the way that EU leaders tend to come from smaller European countries). That could help Mexico's Agustin Carstens, a declared candidate. He is impeccably qualified; but so impeccably in line with the Washington Consensus that he might not bring much practical change. Russia favours Grigory Marchenko, Kazakhstan's central banker, but he has little significant international experience.

This unwanted succession has already presented an existential challenge to Europe's hold over the IMF. It may yet provide just such a challenge to the unity of the nascent BRIC bloc.