The jitters were for real. All the more because it was widely assumed that the replacement for Jim Wolfensohn at the head of the World Bank, that funder of do-gooder projects, would be someone skilled in diplomacy and respected in places far away from America. So it was that people across the globe sputtered over beverages almost in unison on hearing America's choice: Paul Wolfowitz.

The most neo-connist of neo-cons, wily player of oil politics, brash advocate of us hegemony, formulator of the Iraq War, demolition derby champion of democracy... Wolfowitz has a reputation nobody would envy outside the most conservative confines of America. Yet, the man has promised to direct his ammunition at poverty, and the global horror at the announcement of his name has gone, more or less, even if the snide asides haven't; expect to hear more about democracy defined as two wolves and a lamb voting on what's for lunch.

Has Wolfowitz turned into a woolly hear-your-voice-feel-your-pain winner of hearts?

Unlikely. But not out of the question.

After all, neo-cons have always seen themselves as doing everyone a good turn for the long term, even if done harshly. And don't misunderestimate the guilt of a flaming accident. It can push one towards formulating a real case for global unity, instead of playing the rubber stamp for the cynical interests of a few.

Is Wolfowitz up to it?

On rebuilding Iraq, expect barrel-loads of action. Under Wolfensohn, the World Bank wanted a un nod before going ahead with funds. Wolfowitz would go right ahead. But the actual test would not be any such 'generosity'. It would be whether the World Bank behaves as a bank of the world, with priorities set by what the people of the world think, independently, not by a bunch of pointy heads pencilling maps in Washington dc.

The good part is that the gaze of global scrutiny will be especially sharp-and focussed. People have wisened up. Even on the tail-end of remote archipelagos, people understand reward and punishment only too well, no matter how cleverly disguised. Wolfowitz' taking over would make suspicion the default attitude towards the bank. This has its perils. All it would take is a blueprint that uses devious means to claim the high ground for an all-round eruption of rock concert noise proportions, or worse. Throw in the sceptical voices from academia into the cauldron, and the grandest of superhuman saviour stories would have no takers.

In short, Wolfowitz would have to prove himself a worthy world citizen just to avoid instant dismissal as a stooge of special interests.

India, of course, has its own reason to hold the World Bank to its principle of honest neutrality. Not that the money matters all that much. It's just over $2 billion (Rs 8,800 crore) a year, which is less than the country's private investment inflows. Still, the bank funds several projects running into a few hundred million dollars every year, delivering healthcare, building roads, saving forests, channelling water resources and much else. It is especially active in the poorer parts of the country. In specific focus these days: the poverty-stricken states of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand and Orissa.

Now, while the bank routinely faces allegations of fund leakage and rural-life distortion, most of the heat it has generated in recent times is for a policy shift. After having all but renounced big dams in the early 1990s, when they were under assault for their ecological and human costs, the World Bank has signalled a return to pumping big bucks into hydroelectric power projects. This is interesting because it need not be a return to its old posture, actually. The bank would not want to be seen as a force multiplier for 'settlers' driving 'the natives' off their land. Dam designs are of various kinds, and can conceivably be win-win too, if done intelligently. In fact, if the early signs are any indication of what is to come, the policy shift could actually mark the beginning of an intense involvement with what is often termed 'integrated water resource management'.

The World Bank is not alien to this sort of thing. It has been involved in detailed water planning in the past in several parts of the world, and has studied the sub-Himalayan water scenario in quite some detail too. So, just as the word suggests, 'integrated' could well mean a programme that thinks global in the conception of ideas, and acts local in the implementation of the same.

Wolfowitz, to be sure, is a man devoted to big picture strategy, and may never really become a woolly do-gooder type. But perhaps there's wisdom in waiting to see what he has in mind. Which is why a Wolfowitz under the world's watch warrants a welcome. Even if it's a wobbly welcome.