International Monetary Fund boss Christine Lagarde wants more of your taxpayer dollars, a lot more power for the IMF on the world stage, and a bigger voice for other largely autocratic members of the global outfit at the expense of the U.S. government’s influence. To get it, however, Lagarde first needs a reluctant U.S. Congress to approve a deeply controversial “reform” package being advanced by globalists, the Obama administration, the Council on Foreign Relations, and tyrants of various varieties around the world.
If the “reforms” were to be approved, regimes such as the ruthless Communist Chinese dictatorship would play a much larger role in controlling the IMF — which currently receives almost 20 percent of its funding from U.S. taxpayers. The IMF wish list would also double the outfit’s “reserves” to more than $750 billion; all under the guise of “helping” bankrupt governments presiding over imploding economies by shackling the people they rule to unpayable debts with draconian strings attached. The IMF proto-global currency known as Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) would get a big boost, too.
World rulers are determined to see their plan to further expand the outfit’s power and resources through to fruition. Russian strongman Vladimir Putin, for example, recently threatened that the IMF and its member regimes would simply bypass the American people’s elected representatives to empower the IMF if U.S. lawmakers refuse to do his bidding. Lagarde, meanwhile, is playing “good cop,” even offering to “belly dance” for Congress if it would just submit to the costly and potentially dangerous globalist demands.
In a recent interview with the establishment-controlled Financial Times — a paper that had multiple attendees meeting with the IMF chief and other globalists at the shadowy Bilderberg summit — Lagarde blasted Congress for not immediately submitting to the controversial agenda. “I spent a lot of time with members of Congress last year trying to show them how ridiculous it is to stand in the way of change,” she said, dismissing as “ridiculous” the concerns of Americans and their elected representatives. “I will keep pushing and pushing on this — I will belly dance if I have to, to get there.”
Speaking at an event last week hosted by Foreign Policy magazine honoring Lagarde as the 2014 “Diplomat of the Year,” the IMF chief reiterated her call for U.S. lawmakers to approve the list of demands. “I would like to add my voice to that of virtually the entire world and certainly the entire IMF membership in calling upon the U.S. Congress to approve the 2010 quota and governance,” she said at the confab, which featured top Obama administration officials as well.
Of course, as Lagarde revealed yet again at the Foreign Policy event, the agenda to empower the IMF goes far beyond shackling nations to wild debts under the guise of “helping” them. Calling for what she described as a “new multilateralism,” the IMF boss said global responses were needed on everything from “climate change” and “gender bias” to “income inequality” and Ebola.
Also problematic is what she called a global economy that was still “struggling to regain cruising speed,” tensions in the Middle East and Ukraine, and more. “Many of the challenges we face represent a collective threat, and call for a cooperative response,” she told the assembled globalists and self-styled foreign policy bigwigs, adding that the IMF was ready to do more on Ebola. “It is only by acting collectively that an individual country’s self-interest can be achieved.”
Employing standard globalist-speak to barely conceal the controversial agenda, Lagarde insisted that the only way to deal with problems is by further centralizing coercive power at the international level. “Challenges like these can only be held at bay — they can only be overcome — through working together,” she argued. “What I am talking about here is a renewed commitment to the global public good.” That “global public good,” of course, would be defined by self-styled global “authorities,” not the public.
Echoing an increasingly common theme among top-level globalists, Lagarde also tried to portray the controversial outfit she leads as some sort of emergency service. “By design, we are expected to go into the most difficult situation; we are expected to be the first responders,” she claimed, without saying who “expected” the IMF to act as economic police and rescue workers. Just last year, UN boss Ban Ki-moon called on the world to “empower the United Nations to be more than a first responder or a last resort.”
Unsurprisingly, the Obama administration — along with Putin, Beijing, and the IMF itself — has been among the most ardent cheerleaders of the “reform” package to empower the IMF and reduce the U.S. government’s influence. Since 2010, the White House has been badgering Congress to approve the plot. More recently, Obama even worked with Democrat lawmakers to sneak the schemes into a Ukraine “aid” bill supposedly aimed at stopping Putin. That aid especially benefited, ironically, Putin and the Kremlin.
Also unsurprising, further empowering the IMF is high on the globalist establishment’s priority list. “We're in a very weak place in terms of the projection of U.S. influence around the rest of the world ... and I think that's true in the economic sphere as well,” Robert Kahn, a senior fellow for international economics at the global government-promoting CFR, was quoted by Foreign Policy as saying. “It's hard for us to show leadership if we don't deliver on our side of the bargain.”
Other than Obama and the CFR, it was not immediately clear who signed up for this alleged “bargain” on behalf of U.S. taxpayers. It certainly was not the American people’s elected representatives in Congress, who must approve any IMF “bargain” prior to it actually becoming a bargain — especially considering the fact that American taxpayers are expected to fork over even more cash in exchange for reduced influence.
Indeed, multiple heavy-hitting Republicans have resisted the global pressure to give up much of what remains of U.S. control at the IMF to make way for Putin, the Chinese Communist dictatorship, and other unsavory regimes. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), for example, said the IMF reform package “would decrease America’s influence at the IMF and perversely would increase Russia’s influence in the IMF.” Even House Speaker John Boehner, widely viewed as part of the establishment wing of the GOP, said the IMF did not need more money.
Scaremongers trying to bully Congress into approving the schemes are citing a dubious new “development bank” created by the so-called BRICS — the mostly communist and socialist regimes ruling over Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. Of course, it is true that those regimes are increasingly seeking to sideline the United States and the U.S. dollar as the global reserve currency. However, none of that would have been possible without the deliberate collaboration of the U.S. globalist establishment in charge of the State Department, the privately owned Federal Reserve, and other key American institutions.
The IMF and its leadership are fully onboard as well. The IMF chief, a former finance minister for the French government, has even said that the outfit she leads may well relocate to Beijing from Washington, D.C., someday. Under her leadership, the IMF also recently outlined a plot to plunder humanity’s remaining wealth with a global tax scheme to prop up mega-banks and bloated governments drowning in debt.
As The New American has documented extensively, however, U.S. insiders, globalists, the Communist Chinese regime, and other global actors have even bigger plans. Eventually, they are plotting to turn the IMF into a global central bank in charge of a truly global reserve currency independent of any nation or government. They say so themselves, in fact. The implications for the U.S. economy would be hard to overstate.
Rather than tolerating threats and lobbying from foreign powers and international bureaucrats, the United States ought to simply withdraw from the IMF and the whole array of globalist bureaucracies altogether. However, if the United States is going to retain its independence, global leadership, and liberty, a sound monetary system and a drastic reduction in Washington’s outlandish borrowing-and-spending spree is also crucial. Without those real reforms, the dollar’s days as the global reserve currency are numbered. And the IMF, along with its unsavory member regimes, will be there waiting to fill the void — possibly even offering SDR-denominated loans to the bankrupt U.S. government.
Alex Newman, a foreign correspondent for The New American, is normally based in Europe. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU. He can be reached at