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
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
After more than a year of review, the National Security Bureau on Monday said it has completed a sweeping declassification of political archives from the Martial Law period, transferring the full collection to the National Archives Administration under the National Development Council. The move marks another significant step in Taiwan’s long journey toward transitional justice. The newly opened files span the architecture of authoritarian control: internal security and loyalty investigations, intelligence and counterintelligence operations, exit and entry controls, overseas surveillance of Taiwan independence activists, and case materials related to sedition and rebellion charges. For academics of Taiwan’s White Terror era —
After 37 US lawmakers wrote to express concern over legislators’ stalling of critical budgets, Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) pledged to make the Executive Yuan’s proposed NT$1.25 trillion (US$39.7 billion) special defense budget a top priority for legislative review. On Tuesday, it was finally listed on the legislator’s plenary agenda for Friday next week. The special defense budget was proposed by President William Lai’s (賴清德) administration in November last year to enhance the nation’s defense capabilities against external threats from China. However, the legislature, dominated by the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), repeatedly blocked its review. The
In her article in Foreign Affairs, “A Perfect Storm for Taiwan in 2026?,” Yun Sun (孫韻), director of the China program at the Stimson Center in Washington, said that the US has grown indifferent to Taiwan, contending that, since it has long been the fear of US intervention — and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) inability to prevail against US forces — that has deterred China from using force against Taiwan, this perceived indifference from the US could lead China to conclude that a window of opportunity for a Taiwan invasion has opened this year. Most notably, she observes that