planners and the Allies in the 1944 foundation at Bretton Woods, she analyzes understandings of their missions over the last quarter century. After describing the important debates between U.S. The Globalizers focuses on both the political context of IMF and World Bank actions and their impact on the countries in which they intervene. Ngaire Woods brilliantly decodes what they do and why they do it, using original research, extensive interviews carried out across many countries and institutions, and scholarship from the fields of economics, law, and politics. But at whose cost? Would borrowing countries be better off without the IMF and World Bank? This book takes readers inside these institutions and the governments they work with. Politics and their own rules and habits explain much of why they have presented globalization as a solution to challenges they have faced in the world economy.”-from the Introduction The greatest success of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank has been as globalizers.

They have not done this out of pure economic zeal.

“The IMF and the World Bank have integrated a large number of countries into the world economy by requiring governments to open up to global trade, investment, and capital. The paper concludes with a proposal for a “democratic security-development policy” built from the bottom-up, in which security and development are both seen as “political” and “economic” ideals in organic synergy.

Hence, the securitization of social life in the region is not resulting in the reproduction of a security-development agenda patterned after the US, but in the reproduction of social antagonisms that spring from the very contradictions of the securitization project itself. Each of these phenomena is inherently unstable and conflict-ridden. In particular, the Americanization of security-development has paved the way either to the strengthening or resurgence of the hegemony, both in policy and discourse, of: “global war on terrorism” over historically sensitive conflict resolution mechanisms “authoritarian liberalism” over democratization and neo-liberalism over developmental statism. This paper argues that 9/11 has accelerated the Americanization of the security-development architecture in Southeast Asia, as shown in the increasing institutionalization of principles and practices that are easily ascribed to US hegemony.

Libration crisis binarydigit rar