John Odling-Smee headed the IMF Department for the former Soviet Union from 1992-2003. In this easy and pleasant memoir with many insights and astute judgment, he guides us through truly historical events. More than any other writer, he tells us what the IMF actually did and the limitations of what it could do in the transition of the former Soviet Union. Rather than defending the IMF or himself, Odling-Smee contemplatively discusses what could possibly have been done differently. On the way, he offers many pertinent observations about how terrible the initial situation was, how few early decisionmakers understood market economics or the outside world, but he also has a good eye for the heroes.
The style of the book is calm and reasoned. The author does not defend the IMF or himself, but does suggest what might have been done differently--maybe not by the IMF, but by the countries in transition. He shows how deep political weakness--above all, corruption and cronyism-- prevented the growth of real market economies
As a senior IMF official, John Odling-Smee was intimately involved in the reform of the countries of the former Soviet Union in the 1990s. In this fascinating book, he explains how macroeconomic stability was established, albeit with ups and downs along the way. But he also shows how deep political weaknesses - above all the pervasive corruption and cronyism - prevented the creation of thriving and competitive market economies in nearly all the successor states. This is ultimately a story of failures. We are living with the consequences of these failures today.
In this engrossing book, Odling-Smee offers fascinating reflections on his work across the post-Soviet states as they - and he - wrestled with the dilemmas of economic reform in the 1990s. It has never been more important to understand the IMF's role in Russia's transition from a planned to market economy, and this book offers a unique account from one of the Fund's leading officials at the time
John Odling-Smee headed the IMF Department for the former Soviet Union from 1992-2003. In this easy and pleasant memoir with many insights and astute judgment, he guides us through truly historical events. More than any other writer, he tells us what the IMF actually did and the limitations of what it could do in the transition of the former Soviet Union. Rather than defending the IMF or himself, Odling-Smee contemplatively discusses what could possibly have been done differently. On the way, he offers many pertinent observations about how terrible the initial situation was, how few early decisionmakers understood market economics or the outside world, but he also has a good eye for the heroes.
Not many people in the former Soviet Union countries know how complicated it was to build a market economy in the 1990s and what role the IMF played. Odling-Smee vividly describes how it all happened and notes unique subtleties and nuances that only he could explain. I do not doubt that the book will be an excellent guide for a wide range of readers, including professional economists, financiers, and historians.
The decade following the break-up of the Soviet Union into 15 new countries was critical in shaping our world. Many of the challenges we now face have their origins in that period. The IMF played a central role in the developments that followed and John Odling-Smee was the leading figure in the IMF. John is an outstanding economist and a person of calmness and authority, greatly respected by all who know him. I watched, and collaborated, in my role as Chief Economist of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development at that time. Learning from his experiences and assessments is of great importance to us all and he writes in a very thoughtful and instructive way. This is an important and fascinating book and offers deep understanding of both history and our times.
This book provides a clear and persuasive documentation of the role of the International Monetary Fund in the transformation of planned economies. But it is much more than that: it constitutes an essential guide to the big debates of the 1990s, including the question of "who lost Russia?"
