WASHINGTON, April 15, 2026 US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has accused the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank of overreacting to the Middle East conflict by downgrading global growth projections and raising inflation expectations.
IMF Downgrades Growth Forecast Amid Energy Price Surge
The IMF revised its global growth forecast downward to 3.1%, citing disruptions from the ongoing Middle East war, particularly the surge in energy prices. Had the conflict not occurred, the organization would have raised its projection by 0.1 percentage points to 3.4%.
Secretary Bessent challenged the revised figures, arguing that the institutions had overstated the economic impact of the conflict. "The IMF and World Bank have a responsibility to provide balanced assessments, not alarmist projections," he stated. Despite his criticism, Bessent acknowledged the IMF's recent refocusing on core mandates like macroeconomic stability and development, calling it a "positive step."
The World Bank, meanwhile, announced it would lift its long-standing ban on financing nuclear power projects, a move seen as part of its broader strategy to address energy security concerns exacerbated by the conflict.
US-IMF Collaboration and Regional Focus
Bessent highlighted the IMF's close cooperation with the US Treasury Department in addressing financial crises in Argentina and Venezuela, praising the partnership as "effective and necessary." The IMF's involvement in these cases has included stabilization programs and debt restructuring efforts.
The Treasury Secretary's remarks come amid heightened scrutiny of international financial institutions' role in mitigating economic shocks. While Bessent did not propose alternative growth figures, he emphasized the need for "prudent, data-driven analysis" rather than what he termed "knee-jerk adjustments" to geopolitical events.
The IMF has not yet responded publicly to Bessent's criticism. Analysts note that the organization's forecasts are typically conservative during periods of instability, reflecting risks such as prolonged energy market volatility. The World Bank's shift on nuclear funding, however, signals a pragmatic approach to diversifying energy sources in crisis-affected regions.
Both institutions face mounting pressure to balance economic realism with the potential for self-fulfilling pessimism. As the Middle East conflict continues, their next moves—whether revising forecasts further or adjusting policy stances—will be closely watched by global markets.