122 SOCIAL SCIENTIST income. However, as Westphal points out in his comment, Korea's rapid recovery from macro-economic crisis owed far more to stabilization policies than to concurrent adjustment policies. Also, the turnabout was based on the supply responsiveness of the Korean private sector which was essentially due to the earlier pattern of growth. It should be pointed out that this pattern of growth was predicated upon strong state intervention and public targeting of exports and high growth sectors, rather than a simple free market ideology. It should be evident that the analyses in this volume amount to a very considerable condemnation of the way in which loan conditionalitics have operated in the past decade. The question must obviously be asked: if the minimum degree of introspection and empirical consideration of results produces such a devasting critique, however, unintcntioned, then why does the World Bank persist in peddling the same set of policies even now? That it does so is clear, not only in India, but also in Eastern Europe where the same unpleasant medicine is being administered even though the resulting costs are likely to be even more damaging. The answer can be had from turning to a consideration not of the World Bank bureaucrats themselves but of their masters: the group of rich industrialised countries who are keen on enforcing and perpetuating their economic dominance in the world. Their continued access to and control over the major share of the world's resources depends on the economic subservience of the vast majority of the world's population spread across many developing and least developed countries, and the set of policies described above are designed to perpetuate this subservience. Economic strategies which effectively de-industrialise large parts of the South even while they operate to increase the supply and reduce the prices of most of the South's exports, obviously operate to the North's advantage. This requirement of North dominated international trade is accompanied by the designs of international private investment, which seeks to exploit developing countries for markets and fields of investment which are increasingly denied to them in the OECD countries because of health and environmental hazards. Bureaucrats within the World Bank are not unaware of these requirements. Thus the Chief Economist of the World Bank (Lawrence Summers) in a recent memo, argued that the Bank should be encouraging the movement of 'dirty' (i.e. polluting and environment-degrading) industries to the developing world as a systematic part of its strategy. All this makes it clear that the imposition of typical World Bank-IMF conditions must be seen as part of the same strategy on the part of the rich nations as that currently underway in GATT and other multilateral institutions, to force developing countries to accept a world order that is fundamentally unequal and will become more unequal as these conditions are accepted.