At the latest Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting last week, the US Federal Reserve unexpectedly announced it would maintain its entire third-round quantitative easing (QE) measures, including its US$85 billion monthly bond-buying program. However, a major concern about the Fed’s decision is that it could be likened to the story of the boy who cried wolf. People will become less willing to take seriously whatever is said by the Fed until monetary tightening becomes a reality.
The policy statement issued by the FOMC on Wednesday suggests that the Fed may need more encouraging signals from the US economy before it reduces its asset purchases. The arguments over the debt ceiling and budget between the White House and Congress, as well as the tightening of financial conditions in the US — which Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke cited at a press conference after the FOMC meeting — appear to be other reasons behind the bank’s suspension of a policy change.
Initially, the Fed’s decision boosted global markets as investors’ had been reluctant ever since Bernanke hinted in May that the US central bank might begin tapering its asset-purchase program as early as this month.
Most people thought the Fed’s decision, compared with market expectations, demonstrated its policymakers’ higher cautiousness about the US’ economic outlook in relation to the winding down of its bond purchases. On Wednesday, the bank also revised downward its GDP growth forecasts for this year and next year.
However, the early euphoria over the decision quickly gave way to questions about how long the US central bank would keep its stimulus policies and the low cost of the US dollar. With the Fed delaying the normalization of its monetary policy, the market is now entering a new period of uncertainty, with investors wondering how long it will be before a liquidity crunch kicks in.
It is clear that the kind of tapering talk from Bernanke and other members of the FOMC had induced widespread speculations of such action over the past few months. However, there are concerns that the Fed’s latest decision not to taper will be a blow to its credibility and a setback for its effort to communicate with the public. There is no guarantee that this will happen, but it should not be taken for granted that investors will remain attentive to Fed policymakers.
The Fed might have missed a perfect opportunity to begin an exit from QE, which the market had widely expected. It had already been priced in the exchange rate and stock market volatility of emerging markets. No matter how hard Bernanke tried in his press conference to defend the bank’s stance, or how well policymakers clarify the bank’s move, last week’s decision not to taper, rather than a modest reduction in bond purchases, meant the markets have lost trust in the Fed.
The Fed’s unconventional QE will necessarily slow someday. In emerging markets in Asia and for Taiwan, investors will need to confront the ongoing uncertainties of tapering, while central banks must keep a close eye on the inflows of hot money and take necessary measures to maintain the stability of their national currency.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS