Click here for previous Globalist Agenda Watch updates.

…The highlighted point is a rather interesting one, isn’t it?

…From page 7.

…From IMF.org
>>> If the IMF membership decides it is necessary to put forward this option, I would hope that the United States would join the SupraFund and accept the hastening of the inevitable day when its capacity to block certain decisions in the IMF has been eliminated because its size relative to the global economy has shrunk. This would be a complex way of implementing that reality, but it is one that should be actively considered given that the United States recently has been irresponsible in exercising its capacity to block a needed, important evolution of the IMF in the form of the 2010 reform package.The impasse over implementation of the 2010 reform package has seriously damaged US leadership and leverage in the IMF with spillovers into other areas of international economic and financial cooperation such as standards governing financial institutions and trade agreements. Partners will increasingly ask: Is it worth doing business with the US executive branch if the US legislative branch will resist or reject resulting international agreements?The impasse also threatens the central role of the IMF itself because its financing and governance essentially have been frozen. This has in turn accelerated the tendency to replace the IMF (and its Bretton Woods twin, the World Bank Group) with other institutions of international economic and financial cooperation in which the United States has little or no influence—such as the New Development Bank (established by Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa with an emergency lending component), the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (led by China), the Chiang Mai Initiative Multilateralization (an Asian self-help financing arrangement), and the European Stability Mechanism (a European self-help financing arrangement). These trends promote the further fragmentation of the international monetary cooperation that underlies everything that the IMF does to promote global economic growth and financial stability.This Policy Brief has outlined four options to break this impasse. The first two options (doing nothing and waiting for the US Congress to act and restarting the 15th quota review) do not promise to break the impasse, much less move the process of IMF governance reform forward. Consequently, IMF members and the US executive branch should consider the third option (risking loss of the US veto) to bring pressure on the US Congress. If the US executive branch declines to cooperate, the fourth option (bypassing the United States to create a new SupraFund) should be developed as a credible threat. <<<
_________
Source:
Leave a Reply