If the World Bank and International Monetary Fund’s annual Spring Meetings feel a little quieter this year, that’s probably not an accident. Both institutions are walking a diplomatic tightrope as they convene during a 180-day review ordered by the Trump administration in February — a process that could reshape their relationship with their largest shareholder: the United States.
That looming uncertainty is casting a shadow over this week’s meetings. The official focus is job creation, but there are questions around funding, energy strategy, climate commitments, and geopolitical influence. The meetings come at a precarious moment for multilateral cooperation, with aid budgets shrinking, global debt rising, and trade uncertainty rattling economies.
Will this year be that different from other meetings, though? Maybe, maybe not. As one source reminds me, “There’s always a circus at the Spring Meetings.”
📧 Are you heading to the circus? My colleague Jesse Chase-Lubitz and I will be there all week — reach out to us with tips at jesse.chaselubitz@devex.com or adva.saldinger@devex.com, or just say hi if you see us in the hallways.
Should I stay or should I go?
The biggest question at the meetings? Whether — and how — the U.S. plans to stay engaged with the World Bank and IMF. While few expect President Donald Trump to fully withdraw, the uncertainty is causing jitters.
The 180-day review of international organizations, initiated via executive order, is ongoing. Sources tell me that the U.S. Treasury Department is actively involved, but the administration’s ultimate intentions remain opaque — particularly given a lack of appointees in key Treasury roles overseeing the World Bank and IMF.
“This White House does not work like a normal process where decisions are made up and down the chain. It could easily be that somebody whispers something, Elon Musk could say something to the President, and we could withdraw from the World Bank with no notice to the Treasury Secretary, right?” Todd Moss, executive director of the Energy for Growth Hub, tells me. “So the normal process is completely up in the air.”
Still, there are strategic incentives for the U.S. to remain involved. The World Bank amplifies American dollars with high returns and offers Washington a powerful platform for influence. Abandoning that role could open the door for rivals like China to fill the vacuum.
The U.S. should remain a part of the World Bank — which can align with the Trump administration’s “America First” foreign policy — but the institution is “way off course” and the U.S. should use its leadership to make changes, Rep. French Hill, the chair of the House Financial Services Committee, which oversees the U.S. relationship with multilateral development banks, told Devex last week. The bank should focus on eliminating poverty rather than on climate priorities, he said, and the IMF should go back to the basics too.
Read: US Congressman French Hill — World Bank ‘way off course’ (Pro)
ICYMI: Could the future of the World Bank be outside of Washington? (Pro)
Background: Could the US pull out of the World Bank? Unlikely — but not impossible
+ A Devex Pro membership helps sustain the journalism we’re able to bring you. Not yet gone Pro? Start your 15-day free trial today to access all our expert analyses, insider insights, funding data, exclusive events, career resources, and more. Check out all the exclusive content and events available to you.
Funding questions
The future of the International Development Association, or IDA — the World Bank’s concessional fund for the poorest countries — is another open question.
The Biden administration pledged $4 billion to IDA last year, but it’s unclear whether the Trump administration will honor that commitment. Most expect a reduction, though some fear the worst: No U.S. funding at all.
World Bank President Ajay Banga said last week he doesn’t yet know what the U.S. contribution will be. If major donors like the U.S. and U.K. scale back, the IDA fund may shrink from $100 billion to closer to $80 billion–$85 billion over the next three years — a blow at a time when concessional finance is desperately needed.
ICYMI: World Bank’s Ajay Banga defends climate strategy ahead of Spring Meetings
Work it out
The theme of this meeting is jobs, and Banga clearly wants the bank to orient itself around creating jobs.
“We’re trying to change things here and look to deploy proven tools to unlock growth, to reduce fragility and generate returns for people, for businesses and for the global economy. And the idea is to build a bank that delivers what is demanded — jobs — because jobs are the best way to drive a nail in the coffin of poverty,” he said last week, adding that not creating jobs will create more global instability.
Expect the bank to announce a retooled Private Sector Investment Lab — one that’s bigger, focused on key job-creating sectors, and moving from testing ideas to wider implementation.
Meanwhile, the IMF is likely to acknowledge a worsening debt crisis. While no major announcements are expected, behind-the-scenes conversations may advance plans to expand eligibility for the Group of 20 largest and emerging economies’ Common Framework for debt relief. A new debt “playbook” for low-income countries is also expected soon.
Nuke kids on the block
The World Bank’s climate commitments — and its broader energy strategy — are also in the spotlight.
Despite political headwinds from Washington, the bank recently reaffirmed that 45% of its financing will go to climate-related projects. This doesn’t necessarily mean climate-specific or climate-only work, as much of the bank's work on climate is about designing infrastructure to withstand climate events.
While the policy may be staying the course, don’t expect a lot of public climate talk, and there are also fewer climate events on the agenda. What will be discussed is energy — and the potential for a policy shift that Banga has been discussing since last year.
Banga would like the bank to pursue an “all-of-the-above” strategy — including natural gas, hydro, geothermal, wind, and possibly nuclear energy, which the bank currently bans. U.S. lawmakers have backed a change to the nuclear policy and African leaders have been pushing for more natural gas investments.
Banga plans to present an updated energy policy for board approval in June but is already laying the groundwork, including likely in discussions this week.
Read: US explores the literal nuclear option
Meeting the moment
The uncertainty around U.S. engagement also represents a key test to the leadership of the World Bank and the IMF. Banga has engaged with Congress, the White House, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and he said he has “active discussions” with the Trump administration that have been constructive.
While it’s rumored there may be some questions about whether Banga — who was appointed by former U.S. President Joe Biden — will stay in the job or be pushed out, I’m told that most people think his job is pretty safe.
“He is a very pragmatic man, and probably exactly the right answer for the moment” in terms of diffusing hot-button issues such as climate and in trying to draw connections between borrowing country priorities and the policies of the bank’s major donors including the U.S., a former U.S. government official tells me.
IMF chief Kristalina Georgieva was trying to strike the right balance in her speech previewing these meetings on Thursday — acknowledging the disruption of U.S. trade policy and tariffs, while also praising other U.S. policy moves.
With geopolitical fractures widening and donor uncertainty growing, the World Bank and IMF will be carefully managing their optics. And we’ll be watching, so stay tuned for more about everything from the bank’s focus on jobs, its nuclear energy policy, climate at the bank, and more.
More reading: What to watch at the 2025 World Bank-IMF Spring Meetings
🎧 Listen: What can we expect from the World Bank Spring Meetings?
+ Be the first to get our on-the-ground coverage of the meetings by keeping your eyes on the daily Newswire and signing up for our dedicated development finance newsletter, the weekly Devex Invested — hitting inboxes tomorrow!
Sign up to Newswire for an inside look at the biggest stories in global development.
About the author
Adva Saldinger@AdvaSal
Adva Saldinger is a Senior Reporter at Devex where she covers development finance, as well as U.S. foreign aid policy. Adva explores the role the private sector and private capital play in development and authors the weekly Devex Invested newsletter bringing the latest news on the role of business and finance in addressing global challenges. A journalist with more than 10 years of experience, she has worked at several newspapers in the U.S. and lived in both Ghana and South Africa.
