Mainly looking at the international monetary fund (IMF) and World Bank, it is obvious that the practices of this system are a big-time threat to the sovereignty of some of its member states, also not transparent enough to fairness and accountability to it member states as the main purpose of its establishment. Looking at the main purpose of International financial institutions (IFIs), “IMF aimed at stabilizing global financial markets and national currencies by providing the resources to establish secure monetary policy and exchange rate regimes, while the World Bank aimed at rebuilding and facilitating investment in reconstruction and development” by now they should be fewer countries to be referred as developing countries not to talk of under developing countries. It is quite obvious that some of the member states of these intuitions have no say on laws or rules made against their nation with an institution/setting which claim to protect and defend the interest of all.
It’s interesting to know that the institutions (IFIs) run its operations by its members’ contributions, yet the institutions claimed to benefits it members by given/granting loans to developing countries with less interest charge. Its unfortunate that many members countries of the institutions (IFIs) are suffering from economic systems and structure with no or less grantee of safety for its citizens in spite of the institutions economic powers, yet the institution claimed to analyze and examines the country’s economic situation, fiscal and monetary policy, exchange rate, general macroeconomic stability, and any related policies, such as labor policy, trade policy, and social policy (such as the pension system) of its members states yearly. The institutions have become more powerful and richer than their member states, making it possible to influence its members’ economic systems with or no permission, and this is in many ways treating the sovereignty powers of states.
Mainly looking at the main reasons of establishing these institutions as discussed earlier, the institution is less accountable in its practices which should not be (if indeed it established for the benefits of its member’s state, the institutions should be accountable to its members’ states, not the other way round).
There are needs to restructures some of the policies of these institutions, and if I’m opportune I will like to reshape some of the policies such as
- Policies on Surveillance: Some things are better handled by experience, knowledge can never be replaced or exchanged with an experience. for accurate information, I’ll involve appropriate persons in the system (i.e., people with both knowledge and experience who are not limited to economic theories)
- Policies on loan: Reasons for the institutions’ establishment is to benefits its members by helping to stabilize their economic system, quite knowing that the institutions run its operations by the contributions of the members’ resources, the institutions should never in anywhere take unnecessary advantages on it members such as exploiting them. Also, assistance should always be aimed at protecting members sovereignty (i.e protecting members state from external control or from more developing countries)
- Policies of transparency: Seen the institutions are established for the interest of its members, they should be a space for fair hearing and opinions
- Policies on arbitrary and dictatorship system: To create appropriate awareness for rules and changes allowing members states opinions before implementation
- Fair distribution and development policies: Some member states are intentionally violating the institutions’ rules and policies, which has become a treat to the sovereignty of other member states, due to favorable advantage of economic powers. The proper distribution will not just empower but well equip member states with adequate resources to defend its territories and sovereignty from an external threat.