The European Central Bank (ECB) is making its reputation at this time of turmoil and crisis. Barely a month after the rejection of the EU constitution in France and the Netherlands, the EU summit in Brussels ended in a surprisingly acrimonious orgy of national egoisms and no deal. Then the terrorists struck in London. With all this trouble, the ECB is showing itself to be an "anchor of stability" by steadfastly sticking to its mandate of insuring price stability.
Europe suffers from a profound crisis of confidence. Its economy, for example, cannot recover properly because consumers, lacking confidence in the ability of their political leaders to solve the economy's manifold economic problems (budget deficits and pensions, among others), are saving for a rainy day they feel is just around the corner -- and businessmen are reluctant to invest, because they don't trust governments to make the necessary economic reforms.
The public's lack of confidence in the EU's political leadership is totally justified. Instead of actually doing something constructive about Europe's essential problem -- reforming expensive welfare states to ensure global competitiveness -- Europe's political leaders are hiding behind straw-man arguments about "ultra-liberal Anglo-Saxon models," and pressuring the ECB to lower interest rates as if European economic weakness were Frankfurt's fault.
Europe's finance ministers portray the ECB as closed to dialogue. When testifying before the EU parliament's economic and monetary affairs committee, Luxembourg prime minister and Euro-group chairman Jean-Claude Juncker said there should be "open and frank" talks between the euro-group ministers and the ECB -- and French finance minister Dominique de Villepin said the same thing.
According to a knowledgeable ECB source, however, Europe's finance ministers regularly meet in secret with the ECB leadership for a mutual and frank exchange of views on monetary policy and other issues. The dialogue already exists though the public does not know it. Such disingenuousness does little to boost confidence in Europe's political leadership.
The ECB has done all it can for growth by giving Europe a prolonged period of monetary stability at record-low interest rates. Does anyone really believe consumers are holding back on spending -- and businessmen postponing their investments -- in anticipation of that next drop in interest rates? To paraphrase Keynes, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.
"The last thing Europe needs now is an interest-rate cut," says one influential member of the ECB Governing Council in a candid assessment of the current situation. Capitulating to outside political pressure is no one's definition of an "anchor of stability." The euro would collapse, and the ECB finished as a creditable central bank.
Moreover, ECB chief economist Otmar Issing predicts long-term interest rates would go up -- not down -- as inflationary expectations increased. So cutting interest rates would not only be stupid -- it would be crazy.
But the ECB is not going to cut rates even though, for public-relations reasons of keeping the political wolves at bay, it deceptively hints it might. Don't be fooled by such feints. The ECB is holding fast and, in doing so, demonstrates to Europe's peoples that there is at least one EU institution they can trust.
This is vital. History shows political turmoil often leads to inflation, which only fuels further turmoil. Europeans can bet their last euro the ECB will not let the fledgling common currency be ravaged by inflation because their political leaders, having failed to do their jobs, now fear they might lose them.
Indeed, the courage currently demonstrated by the ECB in sticking to its guns should serve as a model for Europe's future politicians. Once they realize they can't bully the ECB into unwanted and self-destructive interest-rate cuts, EU leaders actually might summon up the will to lead -- which is, after all, what they have been elected to do.
Melvyn Krauss is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past