Traditionally, “you should go to the IMF” was not something you would say to friendly neighbors and close allies. Over the past few decades, the IMF has become associated with excessive fiscal austerity, extreme political insensitivity, and — since the Asian financial crisis of 1997-1998 — with an out-and-out stigma. Countries borrowed from the IMF only under duress, when all else failed — and when there was simply no other way to pay for essential imports. (For Iceland in the fall of 2008, for example, the only alternative to IMF financing was to eat locally obtained goods, which mostly means fish.)
But the IMF has changed a great deal in recent years, largely under the auspices of Dominique Strauss-Kahn, its current managing director. Strauss-Kahn, a former French finance minister and contender for the Socialist nomination for the French presidency, has pushed through changes that allow the IMF to lend without conditions in some circumstances, and to give greater priority to protecting social safety nets (including unemployment benefits and healthcare systems). He has also moved the fund decisively away from its obsession with fiscal austerity measures (a big early mistake — with lasting traumatic consequences — in Indonesia and Korea in late 1997).
Greece undoubtedly has serious problems today. The great opportunities offered by European integration have been largely squandered. And lower interest rates over the past decade — brought down to German levels through Greece being allowed, rather generously, into the euro zone — led to little more than further deficits and a dangerous buildup of government debt.
Germany and France — as de facto leaders of the EU — are haggling over a belated support package, but they have made it abundantly clear that Greece must slash public-sector wages and other spending. Greek trade unions know what this means — and are in the streets.
IMF on sidelines
If Greece still had its own currency, everything would be easier. Just as in the case of the UK since 2008, the Greek exchange rate would depreciate sharply. This would lower the cost of labor, restoring competitiveness (as in Asia after 1997-1998) while also inflating asset prices and thereby helping borrowers who are underwater on their mortgages and other debts.
But, with Greece and other troubled euro-zone economies (known to their detractors as the PIIGS: Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain) having surrendered monetary policy to the European Central Bank (ECB) in Frankfurt, their currencies cannot fall in this fashion. So Greece — and arguably the PIIGS more generally — is left with the need to massively curtail demand, lower wages, and reduce the public-sector workforce. The last time we saw this kind of precipitate fiscal austerity — when countries were tied to the gold standard — it contributed directly to the onset of the Great Depression in the 1930s.
This is a situation tailor-made for Strauss-Kahn and the “new IMF” to ride to the rescue. Since early last year, the fund has had significantly greater resources to lend to countries in trouble, to cushion the blow of crisis, and to offer a form of international circuit-breaker when it looks like the lights might otherwise go out. The idea is not to prevent necessary adjustments — for example, in the form of budget-deficit reduction — but to spread them out over time, to restore confidence, and to serve as an external seal of approval on a government’s credibility.
The IMF was created in the waning days of World War II, essentially as a US-West European partnership. Europe retains strong representation at the IMF, and has always chosen its top leader — in fact, most emerging markets (in Asia, Latin America and Africa) complain that Europe is overrepresented and has far too much say in how the fund operates. Yet at this moment of growing European crisis, while there is still time to act, the IMF is confined to the sidelines.
perceived rival
This is partly because German Chancellor Angela Merkel, currently maneuvering to ensure that a German is the next head of the ECB, does not want the fund to become more involved in euro-zone policies. The IMF might reasonably take the position that ECB policies have been overly contractionary — resulting in a strong euro and very low inflation – and are no longer appropriate for member countries in the midst of a financial collapse. If the IMF were to support Europe’s weaker economies, this would challenge the prevailing ideology among Frankfurt-dominated policy makers.
But the real reason is much simpler. When French President Nicolas Sarkozy put forward Strauss-Kahn’s name to run the IMF, he meant to park a past and potentially future rival in a faraway place about which people cared little. Then the global financial crisis hit, and Strauss-Kahn was propelled to center stage.
With France’s next presidential election fast approaching in 2012, the last thing Sarkozy now needs is for Strauss-Kahn to play a statesman-like role in saving the eurozone. We can expect to hear all kinds of misleading excuses from EU sources for excluding the IMF: “The fund is too American,” “Europe must resolve its own problems” and “the IMF is not appropriate to our circumstances.” Given the magnitude of the Greek crisis, they will all ring hollow.
Sometimes history is driven by deep forces beyond our control, and sometimes by sheer chance. And at other times, like now, much that hangs in the balance is affected by the deliberate, personal, and short-term tactical considerations of people running for election.
The EU’s leaders will try hard to keep the IMF at bay. This is not good news for Greece — or for anyone who cares about global financial stability.
Simon Johnson, a former chief economist at the IMF, is a professor at MIT’s Sloan School of Business and a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
Elbridge Colby, America’s Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, is the most influential voice on defense strategy in the Second Trump Administration. For insight into his thinking, one could do no better than read his thoughts on the defense of Taiwan which he gathered in a book he wrote in 2021. The Strategy of Denial, is his contemplation of China’s rising hegemony in Asia and on how to deter China from invading Taiwan. Allowing China to absorb Taiwan, he wrote, would open the entire Indo-Pacific region to Chinese preeminence and result in a power transition that would place America’s prosperity
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
All 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and suspended Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安), formerly of the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), survived recall elections against them on Saturday, in a massive loss to the unprecedented mass recall movement, as well as to the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) that backed it. The outcome has surprised many, as most analysts expected that at least a few legislators would be ousted. Over the past few months, dedicated and passionate civic groups gathered more than 1 million signatures to recall KMT lawmakers, an extraordinary achievement that many believed would be enough to remove at
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
RSS