Resign, step aside, go

The U.S. government has zero investment in retaining Paul Wolfowitz as president of the World Bank, but millions of poor people rely on the economic health and credibility of the institution.

Wolfowitz is an impediment, a liability, who ought to be sacked if he is too dense and proud to quickly step aside.

He is in trouble because he arranged for his girlfriend to get a promotion and pay raises after she left the World Bank for a job at the State Department when he became president of the international lending organization.

Over the weekend, the board of the 185-member World Bank expressed deep concern about the future of the institution and worried about its financial stability. Wolfowitz was already in trouble as he struggled to meet a three-year, $30 billion goal. Wolfowitz, a former deputy secretary of defense and architect of the Bush administration's Iraq war policy, was not well-received when he arrived. He rankled World Bank staff with broad accusations of corruption in lending policies to the poorest of nations, and he filled key posts with his own people.

He was arrogant and incompetent when he worked for the secretary of defense. He is fumbling and bumbling with an agency that employs 10,000 people worldwide, and has it roots in reconstruction and assistance that started before the end of World War II.

Wolfowitz is expendable, but the important job of the nurturing recumbent economies to their feet goes to the health and security of the planet.

Instead of wondering if he will go, the more-constructive question is who will replace him? Americans have held the presidency since the World Bank's creation in 1944 at Bretton Woods, N. H. Key donors and benefactors are muttering about a change.

Our nominee would be British Prime Minister Tony Blair, soon to be unemployed and available. His skills and experience are a perfect match for the demands and importance of the assignment.

Wolfowitz must go. Forget any decent interval and grace period. Fire him if he will not quit.