IMF: why we’re bullish on Iran
Earlier this week, I posted about the International Monetary Fund’s surprisingly optimistic assessment of the Iranian economy. A Wall Street Journal article included some tough criticism of the Fund’s methods and noted a discrepancy between the new assessment and an earlier, more gloomy, report on Iran. In a letter published in today’s Journal, the Fund ...
Earlier this week, I posted about the International Monetary Fund's surprisingly optimistic assessment of the Iranian economy. A Wall Street Journal article included some tough criticism of the Fund's methods and noted a discrepancy between the new assessment and an earlier, more gloomy, report on Iran. In a letter published in today's Journal, the Fund offers some additional detail:
Earlier this week, I posted about the International Monetary Fund’s surprisingly optimistic assessment of the Iranian economy. A Wall Street Journal article included some tough criticism of the Fund’s methods and noted a discrepancy between the new assessment and an earlier, more gloomy, report on Iran. In a letter published in today’s Journal, the Fund offers some additional detail:
The lower projections reported in the IMF’s Regional Economic Outlook in April were not based on third-party independent analyses, as reported in the article. Rather, they were our estimates based on limited information we had of the Iranian economy at the time.
[T]wo key factors contributed to our revising the growth numbers upward—statistics we collected in a recent mission which indicated an exceptional agricultural performance in the past two years as well as the positive impact of the high oil prices on a highly diversified Iranian economy.
Finally—and as in any member country—our projections remain independent of the authorities’ views; indeed, the growth forecasts for 2011-12 are lower than the authorities’ and below past trends despite the higher potential brought about by the subsidy reform. These estimates are balanced by the need to continue with reforms in the corporate and financial sectors and the negative impact of the sanctions.
David Bosco is a professor at Indiana University’s Hamilton Lugar School of Global and International Studies. He is the author of The Poseidon Project: The Struggle to Govern the World’s Oceans. Twitter: @multilateralist
More from Foreign Policy

Saudi-Iranian Détente Is a Wake-Up Call for America
The peace plan is a big deal—and it’s no accident that China brokered it.

The U.S.-Israel Relationship No Longer Makes Sense
If Israel and its supporters want the country to continue receiving U.S. largesse, they will need to come up with a new narrative.

Putin Is Trapped in the Sunk-Cost Fallacy of War
Moscow is grasping for meaning in a meaningless invasion.

How China’s Saudi-Iran Deal Can Serve U.S. Interests
And why there’s less to Beijing’s diplomatic breakthrough than meets the eye.