Recurring financial crises in the semi-periphery of the international economic system have raised serious questions concerning the role of the IMF in the era of financial globalization, particularly in the aftermath of the Asian Crisis of 1997. This paper attempts to provide a critical and, at the same time, balanced perspective on the Fund's involvement in crisis-ridden emerging markets, with special reference to the recent Turkish experience. The analysis points towards both the limitations underlying the Fund's approach and some of the dilemmas faced by the organization in trying to reform the economies of debtor countries, given the nature of the domestic political environment in those countries. It is also argued that the kinds of reforms promoted by the Fund are incomplete, insofar as they focus only on the regulatory role of the state, neglecting issues relating to income distribution and longer-term development. Two key conclusions follow: firstly, crisis-ridden countries need to develop a domestic political base to "internalize" the kind of reforms sponsored by the IMF, which are necessary to enable these countries to benefit from the process of globalization. Secondly, the countries concerned need to extend their horizons and develop their domestic capacities in areas such as income distribution and longer-term competitiveness, areas not traditionally emphasized by the Fund.
