The most surprising and controversial thing about last month's rate hike by the European Central Bank (ECB) was that, after two and a half years of keeping interest rates at exceptionally low levels, the bank ventured an increase of only 25 basis points with no promise of more to come. Political pressure on Europe's central bank may be the reason for that timid move.
Jean-Claude Trichet, the current ECB president, may be in the same job but not the same environment as his predecessor Wim Duisenberg, who famously remarked, "I hear the politicians, but I don't listen."
Political pressure on the ECB today is much greater than in Duisenberg's time. The political environment is much more hostile. Some of this pressure may be seeping through and affecting ECB policy decisions.
This is an extremely negative development -- and one of the central bank's biggest challenges for this year. Not only will politicians' influence be toward monetary excess, which of course is a serious enough matter for a bank whose primary mandate is price stability, but also the excess will constitute a serious barrier to structural reform, which is essential for European prosperity in a competitive global economy.
Increasingly, Europe's politicians regard excess liquidity and economic reform as substitutes for one another. The more the bank gives on liquidity, the less the politicians will do on reform. Duisenberg recognized this linkage and held firm. The ECB's paltry rate hike last month, together with the supine promise of no plans for further monetary tightening, demonstrates that Trichet is no Duisenberg.
Europe's finance ministers have played a clever game with the ECB. Even though they were already resigned to a 25-basis-point rate increase, the politicians made a big show of being opposed to it, aiming to prevent what they really feared and what was certainly more warranted: a 50-basis-point hike and a warning of more on the way.
Their strategy worked. Luxembourg's finance minister, Jean-Claude Juncker, diplomatically declared after last month's meeting that, "The result could have been worse."
Indeed, even the markets were fooled, giving the ECB a good grade for its unremarkable rate hike.
Inflationary expectations, as measured by the rates on certain market instruments, actually fell after the hike, indicating increased confidence that the ECB will keep a lid on price pressures.
Although the meager rate hike was presented as a consensus of the ECB's Governing Council, it soon became apparent that the decision had been controversial. Some council members, unhappy with Trichet's dovish stance at last month's press conference, made their displeasure known via the press soon after.
In an interview with Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, for example, Bundesbank president Axel Weber made it clear that future rate hikes were very much on the table. Others spoke out as well, and the futures markets quickly predicted another 25-basis-point rate hike in March. The consensus alleged at the press conference simply did not exist.
With political pressures encroaching on the bank's policy decisions and a faux consensus, it is not surprising that there is now nostalgia in Frankfurt for earlier times and for Wim Duisenberg, even among his former critics. Duisenberg's great skills -- under-appreciated by the press and public alike -- were genuine consensus-building in a potentially divisive body and, in Trichet's own words, "an exceptional ability to keep his nerve in some highly demanding and extremely hostile environments."
In particular, the stubborn Dutchman understood the extreme danger if Europe's top monetary authority became too cozy with Europe's politicians, especially at a time when many EU finance ministers view economic reform and excess liquidity as being essentially the same thing.
Wim Duisenberg died last year, but his values, philosophy and wisdom must not be allowed to die with him. The New Year provides a perfect opportunity for Jean-Claude Trichet to resolve that, despite the more trying circumstances in which he must operate, his own policies and procedures will more faithfully reflect Duisenberg and his legacy. Europe deserves no less.
Melvyn Krauss is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. Copyright: Project Syndicate
The bird flu outbreak at US dairy farms keeps finding alarming new ways to surprise scientists. Last week, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) confirmed that H5N1 is spreading not just from birds to herds, but among cows. Meanwhile, media reports say that an unknown number of cows are asymptomatic. Although the risk to humans is still low, it is clear that far more work needs to be done to get a handle on the reach of the virus and how it is being transmitted. That would require the USDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to get
For the incoming Administration of President-elect William Lai (賴清德), successfully deterring a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) attack or invasion of democratic Taiwan over his four-year term would be a clear victory. But it could also be a curse, because during those four years the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will grow far stronger. As such, increased vigilance in Washington and Taipei will be needed to ensure that already multiplying CCP threat trends don’t overwhelm Taiwan, the United States, and their democratic allies. One CCP attempt to overwhelm was announced on April 19, 2024, namely that the PLA had erred in combining major missions
On April 11, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida delivered a speech at a joint meeting of the US Congress in Washington, in which he said that “China’s current external stance and military actions present an unprecedented and the greatest strategic challenge … to the peace and stability of the international community.” Kishida emphasized Japan’s role as “the US’ closest ally.” “The international order that the US worked for generations to build is facing new challenges,” Kishida said. “I understand it is a heavy burden to carry such hopes on your shoulders,” he said. “Japan is already standing shoulder to shoulder
Former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) used to push for reforms to protect Taiwan by adopting the “three noes” policy as well as “Taiwanization.” Later, then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) wished to save the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) by pushing for the party’s “localization,” hoping to compete with homegrown political parties as a pro-Taiwan KMT. However, the present-day members of the KMT do not know what they are talking about, and do not heed the two former presidents’ words, so the party has suffered a third consecutive defeat in the January presidential election. Soon after gaining power with the help of the KMT’s