Eighty years ago, faced with today’s economic events, nobody would have been in any doubt — we would obviously be living through a crisis in capitalism.
Instead, there is a collective unwillingness to tell it like it is. This is variously a crisis of the EU, a crisis of the euro, a debt crisis or a crisis of political will. It is all those things, but they are subplots of a much bigger story — the way capitalism has been conceived and practiced for the last 30 years has hit the buffers. Unless and until that is recognized, Western economies will be locked in stagnation which could even transmute into a major economic disaster.
Simply put, the world has trillions upon trillions of excessive private debts financed by too many different currencies whose risk is allegedly mitigated by even more trillions of financial bets that, in aggregate, do not minimize the systemic risk one iota. This entire financial edifice, underwritten by tiny amounts of capital, has been created over three decades backed by the theory that markets do not make mistakes. Capitalism is best conceived and practiced, runs the theory, by hunter-gatherer bankers and entrepreneurs owing no allegiance to the state or society.
This is nonsense.
Business and the state co-generate wealth in a system of complex mutual dependence. Markets are beset by mood swings and uncertainty which, if not offset by government action, lead to violent oscillations. Capitalism without responsibility or proportionality degrades into racketeering and exploitation. The prospect of limitless pay is an open invitation to bad, or even criminal, behavior.
Good capitalism cannot happen without referees to blow the whistle or robust frameworks in which markets can function — neither is reliably created by capitalism itself, hence the role of democratic government. Yet the world is trying to solve the legacy of the past 30 years as if none of this were true and, instead, that the practice and theories that created the mess are still valid.
US Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, joining EU finance ministers in Poland as again they pondered how best to end the ongoing crisis in the eurozone, was at least recognizing today’s interdependencies between countries when he urged his fellow ministers to stop bickering because the markets were terrified by the threat of a catastrophic event — with all the risk that poses to the US.
British Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne was also right to declare that a strong euro was in Britain’s interests, but worrying about how a failed euro might impact on yourself is old speak. What the markets need to hear is that Western politicians — whether in the eurozone or not — see the euro as part of the potential solution to capitalism’s current crisis, not its cause, and that they are prepared to do all in their power to support the reforms necessary to make the euro survive and take other measures vital to make the world’s financial system functional again. Geithner and Osborne must put some money where their mouths are.
The euro’s critics, endlessly emphasizing that it is a monetary straitjacket and that the best reform now would be to break it up, miss the point. It was not this so-called straitjacket that caused today’s crisis in the eurozone. It was the interaction of the euro system with a once-in-a-century crisis of capitalism that its designers and supporters, like its critics, never anticipated.
Yes, what the crisis has exposed is that the eurozone needed a 1 trillion-plus euro fund to recapitalize bust banks and underwrite sovereign debt write-downs — this was not written into the original treaty — and that the investment and retail banking arms of the EU’s universal banks need to be ring fenced or formally separated, as Independent Commission of Banking chairman John Vickers’ banking commission proposes for Britain, if they are to be remotely safe, but neither notion was a battle cry of the euro skeptics over the past 10 years.
In fact, the existence of the euro has, until now, been a bulwark against disaster. Suppose it had not been created and that the financial crisis in 2008 had broken over a Europe with multiple floating exchange rates and no European central bank — the euro skeptic utopia. The Irish, Portuguese, Greek, Spanish, Italian and French banking systems would have stood alone and they would have collapsed in a domino effect, interacting with the mega-crisis in Britain and the US. Even some German banks would not have been immune. There would have been a 1930s-scale slump, the break up of the EU and a rise in beggar-my-neighbor devaluations and trade protection.
We have not yet escaped that prospect.
If the euro breaks up, the cascade of subsequent bank failures and debt write-downs will be no less threatening and Britain will be pulled into the vortex. The EU has created a “financial stabilization facility” to try to hold the line, but there is no urgency in launching it. It is still not a proper fund, but a stop-gap provider of borrowing facilities and it is too small. As bad, the German and French governments are wedded to collective austerity — they want to impose long-term balanced budgets not only on themselves, but chilling austerity on the unfortunate states that have to borrow to support their banks and bond markets.
An entire continent is to be blighted by lack of demand in the midst of a capitalist crisis, compounded by Britain’s scorched earth, deficit-reduction plans. Already, many European banks are technically insolvent, recognized by IMF managing director Christine Lagarde, if not by the banks themselves.
Last week, the Bank of England joined the US Federal Reserve, the Bank of Japan and the Swiss central bank in promising Europe’s banks vital liquidity in US dollars, easing the crisis for a while. Time has been bought — Britain is pitching in to save itself — but the outside world needs to go much further. Europe’s stabilization facility must become a fund with a capacity to lend and intervene to see off speculators — Britain, the US, Switzerland and Japan, along with China and oil-rich Arab states, need to contribute alongside Germany.
In return for coming to the relief of the German taxpayer, we should demand two key concessions — one, that Europe sets about ring fencing its universal banks’ investment banking operations to make them less vulnerable; second, that no international cash is forthcoming unless the EU commits to a formal plan for growth in which its stronger countries, notably Germany, promise to stimulate their economies. Britain should agree to defer its own deficit-reduction plans and to issue bonds denominated in euros to contribute to the new euro fund.
We are living through the most dangerous confluence of economic circumstances in modern times. Trying to pretend the interdependencies do not exist or that the collapse of the euro is the answer can only make matters worse. It is a straight choice — we do all we can to help each other get through or risk going down in what could be the worst economic contraction for a century.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under