Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on Thursday arrived in Berlin for talks with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, floating a bold idea of a free-trade zone across the European continent. Ahead of his visit to Germany, Putin, who meets Merkel today, said Russia and Europe could work together to form a free-trade economic zone spanning the entire European continent "from Lisbon to Vladivostok." Merkel, who developed an agreeable working relationship with Putin, a KGB agent in former East Germany, poured cold water on Putin's idea, not least because of a plan championed by the Russian premier to create a joint customs bloc with ex-Soviet Belarus and Kazakhstan. "The steps Russia has taken recently do not point in that direction," Merkel said.
Putin also criticized the European Union for its efforts to liberalize the gas market and promote competition there. For all its good intentions, the plan "undermines a desire by investors to commit funds to new projects," Putin said. Putin and Merkel are expected to discuss the fate of E. ON Ruhrgas' $4.5-billion stake in Gazprom, the world's largest gas producer. A Russian newspaper said E. ON wanted to sell its 3.5 per cent stake in the gas giant to Vnesheconombank, the state economic development bank.
Germany attacks US economic policy
Germany has put itself on a collision course with the US over the global economy, after its finance minister launched an extraordinary attack on policies being pursued in Washington. Wolfgang Schäuble accused the US of undermining its policymaking credibility, increasing global economic uncertainty and of hypocrisy over exchange rates. The US economic growth model was in a "deep crisis," he also warned over the weekend. His comments set the stage for acrimonious talks at the G20 summit in Seoul starting on Thursday. Germany has been irritated at US proposals that it should make more effort to reduce its current account surplus. But Berlin policymakers were also alarmed by last week's US Federal Reserve decision to pump an extra $600bn into financial markets in an attempt to revive US economic prospects through "quantitative easing".
On Friday, Mr Schäuble described US policy as "clueless". In a Der Spiegel magazine interview, to be published on Monday, he expanded his criticism further, saying decisions taken by the Fed "increase the insecurity in the world economy". " They make a reasonable balance between industrial and developing countries more difficult and they undermine the credibility of the US in finance policymaking." Mr Schäuble added: "It is not consistent when the Americans accuse the Chinese of exchange rate manipulation and then steer the dollar exchange rate artificially lower with the help of their [central bank's] printing press." Germany's export success, he argued, was not based on "exchange rate tricks" but on increased competitiveness. "In contrast, the American growth model is in a deep crisis. The Americans have lived for too long on credit, overblown their financial sector and neglected their industrial base. There are lots of reasons for the US problems -- German export surpluses are not part of them."
There was also "considerable doubt" as to whether pumping endless money into markets made sense, Mr Schäuble argued. "The US economy is not lacking liquidity." On the future of the eurozone, Mr Schäuble confirmed in the same interview that Berlin will push for a greater private investor involvement in future bail-outs. To ensure German taxpayers faced the smallest possible burden it was important to have the possibility of an orderly debt restructuring with the participation of private creditors, he said. Germany's proposals for a planned new rescue mechanism have run into resistance from the European Central Bank, which fears they will add to investor uncertainty at a crucial time for Europe's 12-year old monetary union. Mr Schäuble said the new mechanism would apply only to new eurozone debt but argued the European Union "was not founded to enrich financial investors".
Mr Schäuble envisaged a two-stage process in a future crisis. The EU would put in place the same sort of saving and rescue programme as imposed this year on Greece. In a first stage, the term structure of government debt could be extended. If that did not work, then in a second stage, private creditors would have to take a discount on their holdings. In return, the value of the remainder would be guaranteed, Mr Schäuble said.
Source: http://edition.cnn.com/2010/BUSINESS/11/07/germany.us.economic.policy.ft/index.html?hpt=T2
Germany Criticizes Fed Move
German officials, concerned that Washington could be pushing the global economy into a downward spiral, have launched an unusually open critique of U.S. economic policy and vowed to make their frustration known at this week's Group of 20 summit. Leading the attack is Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble, who said the U.S. Federal Reserve's decision last week to pump an additional $600 billion into government securities won't help the U.S. economy or its global partners. The Fed's decisions are "undermining the credibility of U.S. financial policy," Mr. Schäuble said in an interview with Der Spiegel magazine published over the weekend, referring to the Fed's move, known as "quantitative easing" and designed to spur demand and keep interest rates low. "It doesn't add up when the Americans accuse the Chinese of currency manipulation and then, with the help of their central bank's printing presses, artificially lower the value of the dollar."
At an economics conference in Berlin Friday, Mr. Schäuble said the Fed's action shows U.S. policy makers are "at a loss about what to do." Berlin's eagerness to scold the U.S. appears driven in part by a desire for payback after suffering persistent criticism this year for the German economy's reliance on exports. German officials have been on the defensive since French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde suggested in March that German trade surpluses were hurting the competitiveness of weaker euro-zone members and contributing to the bloc's debt crisis. That argument was reinforced as German gross domestic product surged an annualized 9% in the second quarter on improved demand for its manufactured goods abroad. The government now believes the economy will grow 3.4% this year.
Mr. Schäuble hit back at critics in the Der Spiegel interview. "Germany's exporting success is based on the increased competitiveness of our companies, not on some sort of currency sleight-of-hand. The American growth model, by comparison, is stuck in a deep crisis," he said. "The USA lived off credit for too long, inflated its financial sector massively and neglected its industrial base. There are many reasons for America's problems—German export surpluses aren't one of them." Pressure continued at the G-20 finance ministers' meeting last month in Gyeongju, South Korea, where U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner urged countries to commit to keeping their current-account imbalances below 4% of gross domestic product over the next few years.
The measure was aimed at China as part of U.S. attempts to nudge Beijing to let the yuan rise, but Germany, whose current-account surplus is about 6% of GDP according to the International Monetary Fund, also vehemently opposed the plan. The result was a general commitment among G-20 members to keep trade balances at "sustainable levels" and to avoid a cascade of competitive currency devaluations. "Germany's reliance on exports rather than domestic demand may be a successful short-run strategy, but it is very hard on its trading partners and shortsighted," said Christina Romer, a professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley, and until recently the head of President Barack Obama's Council of Economic Advisers. "It is in Germany's interest for its neighbors to prosper because of the interconnectedness of their economies and, especially, their banks."
The Fed's most recent round of quantitative easing also offends German officials' commitment to sound public finances and low inflation. As the global recovery took hold this year, German Chancellor Angela Merkel introduced €80 billion in budget cuts and urged other major economies to undertake their own fiscal consolidation. Mr. Schäuble said last week that he doubted the U.S. would live up to a commitment world leaders made this summer at a G-20 summit in Toronto to halve government deficits by 2013. The aggressive monetary policy in the U.S. runs counter to the strategy of the European Central Bank, whose institutional thinking reflects a German abhorrence of high inflation that goes back to the country's financial ruin in the depression of the 1930s. The rancor from Berlin has left U.S. officials wondering whether the Germans are going to push their frustrations into the heart of the summit discussions in Seoul or whether their objections are largely posturing.
In Washington, the German rhetoric seems particularly shrill at a time when the euro is trading at a lower level against the dollar than it was a year ago—though the euro has risen in value in recent months. U.S. officials are expecting complaints from emerging markets, which are dealing with a flood of money from investors in the U.S. and Europe in search of higher yields. Interest rates in Europe and the U.S. are much lower than in emerging markets, which creates an incentive for investors in both Germany and the U.S. to turn their attention overseas.
Mr. Schäuble, who will accompany Ms. Merkel to the G-20 summit Thursday and Friday in Seoul, South Korea, may have his own motivations for making bold statements and policy proposals that will keep him in the spotlight. Confined to a wheelchair since he was shot in an assassination attempt 20 years ago, Mr. Schäuble, 68, has been in and out of hospital care this year after a routine operation in February related to his paralysis left him with a wound that failed to heal. He missed key meetings last spring as European governments fought to keep Greece out of insolvency, prompting persistent questions over whether he was wealthy enough to represent Germany at a crucial time.
After spending three weeks at a clinic for treatment. Mr. Schäuble made a cantankerous return to German public discourse late last month. In addition to spearheading the government's hard line against U.S. monetary policy, he publicly reprimanded a spokesman for fumbling the release of tax-revenue estimates to reporters—an episode that became a popular Internet video. In Berlin on Friday, Mr. Schäuble said his focus on his job had never flagged. "From a hospital, you can make telephone calls perfectly well," he said.
Source:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703665904575600682866545188.htmlWall St. Helped to Mask Debt Fueling Europe’s Crisis
Wall Street tactics akin to the ones that fostered subprime mortgages in America have worsened the financial crisis shaking Greece and undermining the euro by enabling European governments to hide their mounting debts. As worries over Greece rattle world markets, records and interviews show that with Wall Street’s help, the nation engaged in a decade-long effort to skirt European debt limits. One deal created by Goldman Sachs helped obscure billions in debt from the budget overseers in Brussels. Even as the crisis was nearing the flashpoint, banks were searching for ways to help Greece forestall the day of reckoning. In early November — three months before Athens became the epicenter of global financial anxiety — a team from Goldman Sachs arrived in the ancient city with a very modern proposition for a government struggling to pay its bills, according to two people who were briefed on the meeting.
The bankers, led by Goldman’s president, Gary D. Cohn, held out a financing instrument that would have pushed debt from Greece’s health care system far into the future, much as when strapped homeowners take out second mortgages to pay off their credit cards. It had worked before. In 2001, just after Greece was admitted to Europe’s monetary union, Goldman helped the government quietly borrow billions, people familiar with the transaction said. That deal, hidden from public view because it was treated as a currency trade rather than a loan, helped Athens to meet Europe’s deficit rules while continuing to spend beyond its means. Athens did not pursue the latest Goldman proposal, but with Greece groaning under the weight of its debts and with its richer neighbors vowing to come to its aid, the deals over the last decade are raising questions about Wall Street’s role in the world’s latest financial drama.
As in the American subprime crisis and the implosion of the American International Group, financial derivatives played a role in the run-up of Greek debt. Instruments developed by Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase and a wide range of other banks enabled politicians to mask additional borrowing in Greece, Italy and possibly elsewhere. In dozens of deals across the Continent, banks provided cash upfront in return for government payments in the future, with those liabilities then left off the books. Greece, for example, traded away the rights to airport fees and lottery proceeds in years to come. Critics say that such deals, because they are not recorded as loans, mislead investors and regulators about the depth of a country’s liabilities. Some of the Greek deals were named after figures in Greek mythology. One of them, for instance, was called Aeolos, after the god of the winds.
The crisis in Greece poses the most significant challenge yet to Europe’s common currency, the euro, and the Continent’s goal of economic unity. The country is, in the argot of banking, too big to be allowed to fail. Greece owes the world $300 billion, and major banks are on the hook for much of that debt. A default would reverberate around the globe.
A spokeswoman for the Greek finance ministry said the government had met with many banks in recent months and had not committed to any bank’s offers. All debt financings “are conducted in an effort of transparency,” she said. Goldman and JPMorgan declined to comment. While Wall Street’s handiwork in Europe has received little attention on this side of the Atlantic, it has been sharply criticized in Greece and in magazines like Der Spiegel in Germany. “Politicians want to pass the ball forward, and if a banker can show them a way to pass a problem to the future, they will fall for it,” said Gikas A. Hardouvelis, an economist and former government official who helped write a recent report on Greece’s accounting policies.
Wall Street did not create Europe’s debt problem. But bankers enabled Greece and others to borrow beyond their means, in deals that were perfectly legal. Few rules govern how nations can borrow the money they need for expenses like the military and health care. The market for sovereign debt — the Wall Street term for loans to governments — is as unfettered as it is vast. “If a government wants to cheat, it can cheat,” said Garry Schinasi, a veteran of the International Monetary Fund’s capital markets surveillance unit, which monitors vulnerability in global capital markets. Banks eagerly exploited what was, for them, a highly lucrative symbiosis with free-spending governments. While Greece did not take advantage of Goldman’s proposal in November 2009, it had paid the bank about $300 million in fees for arranging the 2001 transaction, according to several bankers familiar with the deal.
Such derivatives, which are not openly documented or disclosed, add to the uncertainty over how deep the troubles go in Greece and which other governments might have used similar off-balance sheet accounting. The tide of fear is now washing over other economically troubled countries on the periphery of Europe, making it more expensive for Italy, Spain and Portugal to borrow. For all the benefits of uniting Europe with one currency, the birth of the euro came with an original sin: countries like Italy and Greece entered the monetary union with bigger deficits than the ones permitted under the treaty that created the currency. Rather than raise taxes or reduce spending, however, these governments artificially reduced their deficits with derivatives.
Derivatives do not have to be sinister. The 2001 transaction involved a type of derivative known as a swap. One such instrument, called an interest-rate swap, can help companies and countries cope with swings in their borrowing costs by exchanging fixed-rate payments for floating-rate ones, or vice versa. Another kind, a currency swap, can minimize the impact of volatile foreign exchange rates. But with the help of JPMorgan, Italy was able to do more than that. Despite persistently high deficits, a 1996 derivative helped bring Italy’s budget into line by swapping currency with JPMorgan at a favorable exchange rate, effectively putting more money in the government’s hands. In return, Italy committed to future payments that were not booked as liabilities. “Derivatives are a very useful instrument,” said Gustavo Piga, an economics professor who wrote a report for the Council on Foreign Relations on the Italian transaction. “They just become bad if they’re used to window-dress accounts.”
In Greece, the financial wizardry went even further. In what amounted to a garage sale on a national scale, Greek officials essentially mortgaged the country’s airports and highways to raise much-needed money. Aeolos, a legal entity created in 2001, helped Greece reduce the debt on its balance sheet that year. As part of the deal, Greece got cash upfront in return for pledging future landing fees at the country’s airports. A similar deal in 2000 called Ariadne devoured the revenue that the government collected from its national lottery. Greece, however, classified those transactions as sales, not loans, despite doubts by many critics. These kinds of deals have been controversial within government circles for years. As far back as 2000, European finance ministers fiercely debated whether derivative deals used for creative accounting should be disclosed. The answer was no. But in 2002, accounting disclosure was required for many entities like Aeolos and Ariadne that did not appear on nations’ balance sheets, prompting governments to restate such deals as loans rather than sales.
Still, as recently as 2008, Eurostat, the European Union’s statistics agency, reported that “in a number of instances, the observed securitization operations seem to have been purportedly designed to achieve a given accounting result, irrespective of the economic merit of the operation.” While such accounting gimmicks may be beneficial in the short run, over time they can prove disastrous. George Alogoskoufis, who became Greece’s finance minister in a political party shift after the Goldman deal, criticized the transaction in the Parliament in 2005. The deal, Mr. Alogoskoufis argued, would saddle the government with big payments to Goldman until 2019. Mr. Alogoskoufis, who stepped down a year ago, said in an e-mail message last week that Goldman later agreed to reconfigure the deal “to restore its good will with the republic.” He said the new design was better for Greece than the old one.
In 2005, Goldman sold the interest rate swap to the National Bank of Greece, the country’s largest bank, according to two people briefed on the transaction. In 2008, Goldman helped the bank put the swap into a legal entity called Titlos. But the bank retained the bonds that Titlos issued, according to Dealogic, a financial research firm, for use as collateral to borrow even more from the European Central Bank. Edward Manchester, a senior vice president at the Moody’s credit rating agency, said the deal would ultimately be a money-loser for Greece because of its long-term payment obligations. Referring to the Titlos swap with the government of Greece, he said: “This swap is always going to be unprofitable for the Greek government.”
Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/business/global/14debt.html?_r=1The Fed? Ron Paul’s Not a Fan
Ben S. Bernanke, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, has been attacked for failing to foresee the financial crisis, for bailing out Wall Street, and, most recently, for injecting an additional $600 billion into the banking system to give the slow recovery a boost. But Mr. Bernanke will face even more scrutiny in the months to come. On Thursday, House Republican leaders announced that Representative Ron Paul of Texas, the outspoken Republican libertarian who ran for president in 2008, will become the chairman of the subcommittee that oversees the Fed. His position on the central bank is captured in the title of his 2009 book, “End the Fed” (Grand Central Publishing). Here’s some of what he wrote:
The Beginning of the End
“The day the Fed came into being in 1913 may have been the beginning of the end, but the powers it obtained and the mischief it caused took a long time to become a serious issue and a concern for average Americans.”
The Gold Standard
“Whenever I talk of a gold standard, there are always people ready to accuse me of having some obsession or fixation. Fetish is a word thrown around. In fact, I’m only observing reality: the idea of sound money in most of human history has been bound up with gold money.”
A Full-Time Counterfeiting Operation
On Mr. Bernanke: “There is something fishy about the head of the world’s most powerful government bureaucracy, one that is involved in a full-time counterfeiting operation to sustain monopolistic financial cartels, and the world’s most powerful central planner, who sets the price of money worldwide, proclaiming the glories of capitalism.”
New Money Out of Thin Air
“Only the Federal Reserve can inflate the currency, creating new money and credit out of thin air, in secrecy, without oversight or supervision. Inflation facilitates deficits, needless wars and excessive welfare spending.”
Fed Chairmen He Has Known
“Being in Congress in the late 1970s and early 1980s and serving on the House Banking Committee, I met and got to question several Federal Reserve chairmen: Arthur Burns, G. William Miller and Paul Volcker. Of the three, I had the most interaction with Volcker. He was more personable and smarter than the others, including the more recent board chairmen Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke.”
Low Interest Rates
“Artificially low interest rates are achieved by inflating the money supply, and they penalize the thrifty and cheat those who save. They promote consumption and borrowing over savings and investing. Manipulating interest rates is an immoral act. It’s economically destructive.”
The Bailouts
“Today, there is no principled opposition to the corporate bailouts and the Fed’s trillions of dollars of new credit and the takeover of insurance, mortgages, medical care, banks and the auto industry. The arguments have only been over amounts, financial vehicles, and which political group gets to wield the economic power. If there is no moral argument against the economic takeover of America, there will be no resistance to the dictator who rules over our lives with an iron fist.”
The Obama Legacy
“For the same reason a disease cannot be cured by more of the germ that caused it, the inflation and debt accumulation of the Obama years will not inflate our way out of it. This depression will likely last and last.”
Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/weekinreview/12chan.html?scp=2&sq=ron%20paul&st=cseRelated information from the recent past: China Argues to Replace US Dollar
China's central bank has reiterated its call for a new reserve currency to replace the US dollar.
The report from the People's Bank of China (PBOC) said a "super-sovereign" currency should take its place. Central bank chief Zhou Xiaochuan has loudly led calls for the dollar to be replaced during the financial crisis. The bank report called for more regulation of the countries that issue currencies that underpin the global financial system. "An international monetary system dominated by a single sovereign currency has intensified the concentration of risk and the spread of the crisis," the Chinese central bank said. The dollar fell after the report was released. The US currency dropped 1% against the euro to $1.4088, and declined 0.8% versus the British pound to $1.6848.
SDRs
Mr Zhou caused a stir earlier this year when he said the dollar could eventually be replaced as the world's main reserve currency by the Special Drawing Right (SDR), which was created as a unit of account by the IMF in 1969.
CURRENCY RESERVES
- Foreign currency held by a government or a central bank
- Used to pay foreign debt obligations or influence exchange rates
- The dollar is viewed as the world's reserve currency as the vast majority of reserves are held in the US currency
- Smaller amounts are held in euros, pounds and yen
The PBOC said in the report that not only should the world adopt the SDR, but that the IMF should be entrusted with managing a portion of its member countries' foreign currency reserves. "To avoid intrinsic shortcomings in using a sovereign currency as a reserve currency, we need to create an international reserve currency that is divorced from sovereign states and can maintain a stable value over the long term," the PBOC report said. It also issued some veiled criticism of the US policies, saying that one of the major issues was that it was difficult to balance the needs of domestic politics with the requirements of being the world's reserve currency. "The economic development model of debt-based consumption is most difficult to sustain," the PBOC said. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev recently joined Mr Zhou in saying it was time to consider an alternative benchmark currency for international debt. But Russian finance minister Alexei Kudrin then said "it's too early to speak of an alternative".
Source:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/business/8120835.stmThe Demise of the Dollar
In the most profound financial change in recent Middle East history, Gulf Arabs are planning – along with China, Russia, Japan and France – to end dollar dealings for oil, moving instead to a basket of currencies including the Japanese yen and Chinese yuan, the euro, gold and a new, unified currency planned for nations in the Gulf Co-operation Council, including Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi, Kuwait and Qatar. Secret meetings have already been held by finance ministers and central bank governors in Russia, China, Japan and Brazil to work on the scheme, which will mean that oil will no longer be priced in dollars. The plans, confirmed to The Independent by both Gulf Arab and Chinese banking sources in Hong Kong, may help to explain the sudden rise in gold prices, but it also augurs an extraordinary transition from dollar markets within nine years.
The Americans, who are aware the meetings have taken place – although they have not discovered the details – are sure to fight this international cabal which will include hitherto loyal allies Japan and the Gulf Arabs. Against the background to these currency meetings, Sun Bigan, China's former special envoy to the Middle East, has warned there is a risk of deepening divisions between China and the US over influence and oil in the Middle East. "Bilateral quarrels and clashes are unavoidable," he told the Asia and Africa Review. "We cannot lower vigilance against hostility in the Middle East over energy interests and security."
This sounds like a dangerous prediction of a future economic war between the US and China over Middle East oil – yet again turning the region's conflicts into a battle for great power supremacy. China uses more oil incrementally than the US because its growth is less energy efficient. The transitional currency in the move away from dollars, according to Chinese banking sources, may well be gold. An indication of the huge amounts involved can be gained from the wealth of Abu Dhabi, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar who together hold an estimated $2.1 trillion in dollar reserves.
The decline of American economic power linked to the current global recession was implicitly acknowledged by the World Bank president Robert Zoellick. "One of the legacies of this crisis may be a recognition of changed economic power relations," he said in Istanbul ahead of meetings this week of the IMF and World Bank. But it is China's extraordinary new financial power – along with past anger among oil-producing and oil-consuming nations at America's power to interfere in the international financial system – which has prompted the latest discussions involving the Gulf states.
Brazil has shown interest in collaborating in non-dollar oil payments, along with India. Indeed, China appears to be the most enthusiastic of all the financial powers involved, not least because of its enormous trade with the Middle East. China imports 60 per cent of its oil, much of it from the Middle East and Russia. The Chinese have oil production concessions in Iraq – blocked by the US until this year – and since 2008 have held an $8bn agreement with Iran to develop refining capacity and gas resources. China has oil deals in Sudan (where it has substituted for US interests) and has been negotiating for oil concessions with Libya, where all such contracts are joint ventures.
Furthermore, Chinese exports to the region now account for no fewer than 10 per cent of the imports of every country in the Middle East, including a huge range of products from cars to weapon systems, food, clothes, even dolls. In a clear sign of China's growing financial muscle, the president of the European Central Bank, Jean-Claude Trichet, yesterday pleaded with Beijing to let the yuan appreciate against a sliding dollar and, by extension, loosen China's reliance on US monetary policy, to help rebalance the world economy and ease upward pressure on the euro.
Ever since the Bretton Woods agreements – the accords after the Second World War which bequeathed the architecture for the modern international financial system – America's trading partners have been left to cope with the impact of Washington's control and, in more recent years, the hegemony of the dollar as the dominant global reserve currency. The Chinese believe, for example, that the Americans persuaded Britain to stay out of the euro in order to prevent an earlier move away from the dollar. But Chinese banking sources say their discussions have gone too far to be blocked now. "The Russians will eventually bring in the rouble to the basket of currencies," a prominent Hong Kong broker told The Independent. "The Brits are stuck in the middle and will come into the euro. They have no choice because they won't be able to use the US dollar."
Chinese financial sources believe President Barack Obama is too busy fixing the US economy to concentrate on the extraordinary implications of the transition from the dollar in nine years' time. The current deadline for the currency transition is 2018. The US discussed the trend briefly at the G20 summit in Pittsburgh; the Chinese Central Bank governor and other officials have been worrying aloud about the dollar for years. Their problem is that much of their national wealth is tied up in dollar assets. "These plans will change the face of international financial transactions," one Chinese banker said. "America and Britain must be very worried. You will know how worried by the thunder of denials this news will generate."
Iran announced late last month that its foreign currency reserves would henceforth be held in euros rather than dollars. Bankers remember, of course, what happened to the last Middle East oil producer to sell its oil in euros rather than dollars. A few months after Saddam Hussein trumpeted his decision, the Americans and British invaded Iraq.
Report: Secret Plot Against Dollar
A report published Tuesday by a British newspaper sent shockwaves across the world.
The Independent story, entitled "
The demise of the dollar," claimed that several key governments around the world were conspiring in secret meetings to stop trading oil in U.S. federal reserve notes. Calling it a “graphic illustration of the new world order,” the paper reported that Arab governments, China, Russia and even France and Japan would drop the dollar and start pricing oil with a basket of currencies — the Japanese yen, Chinese yuan, the euro and a new currency being created for members of the Gulf Co-operation Council that includes Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Qatar. The report was mostly based on unnamed Arab and Chinese banking sources.
According to
The Independent, the secret meetings between finance ministers and central bankers have already been held. The transition should be complete following a nine-year timeline, with a deadline of 2018. And American officials know of the plan and the meetings, though not the details, the paper reported. "These plans will change the face of international financial transactions," an anonymous Chinese banker told
The Independent. "America and Britain must be very worried. You will know how worried by the thunder of denials this news will generate."
Immediately after the news broke, representatives from at least Kuwait and Saudi Arabia claimed that the report was inaccurate. "At our level, no," said Kuwait’s oil minister, Sheik Ahmed Al Abdullah Al Sabah, according to an Associated Press report entitled ‘
Officials deny UK media report on move from dollar.’ "I didn't even dream about it." Gold hit a record high at over $1,040 an ounce amidst the news, while the dollar fell sharply against world currencies. A
Reuters analysis of the report about the secret meetings claimed it was “a potentially major sign of the greenback's fading status.” The research director from Forex.com called it “another chapter in the plot against the dollar as the world’s most dominant reserve currency.”
This would certainly not be the first call to end the dominance of U.S. currency in world trade. The United Nations recently
called for creating a new global monetary system, while Russia and China have both called for an end to dollar hegemony. Officials around the world have also expressed deep concern about the Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies and artificially low interest rates.
The Independent article also highlighted an alleged potential for military and economic confrontations between the United States and China, citing statements made by government officials. "Bilateral quarrels and clashes are unavoidable," China’s former special envoy to the Middle East told the Asia and Africa Review. "We cannot lower vigilance against hostility in the Middle East over energy interests and security."
Diversifying away from the dollar will be a tricky undertaking for countries like China, Japan, and the Gulf Arab states. They hold trillions of dollars in reserves, and if they started selling rapidly, the price would tank, eroding a significant part of the value of their reserves. But it is not impossible, or even unthinkable. If and when the world does ultimately abandon the dollar, it will be bad news for the American economy. Faced with the prospect of rising prices for imports and a manufacturing base that has been shipped abroad, consumers will find themselves increasingly strapped for purchasing power. But with the Federal Reserve printing debt-money like it’s going out of style, can anyone really blame other countries for wanting to get out?
Source:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/economy/markets-mainmenu-45/2032-report-secret-plot-against-dollarMoscow Says U.S. Leadership Era Is Ending
Perhaps inevitably for a country often lectured by the United States about its own economy, Russia is using the occasion of the American financial crisis to do some lecturing of its own. President Dmitri A. Medvedev has blamed what he called financial “egoism” for the crisis and said it should be taken as a sign that America’s global economic leadership was drawing to a close. Along with some European leaders, Mr. Medvedev has called for greater multilateralism in financial regulation, echoing a Russian position on international relations generally. “The times when one economy and one country dominated are gone for good,” he said Thursday at St. Petersburg State University during the eighth annual Petersburger Dialog, a forum devoted to developing relations with Germany. After the American banking collapses, he said, the world does not want America as a “megaregulator.”
Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, in Russia for the forum, said Germany, too, would “always support a multilateral approach” to market regulation. Along with the Germans and others, Russian leaders contend that poorly regulated American markets caused the current crisis. While it is hardly a new sentiment, in Russia there is a gloating quality, as the American crisis deepens. There has been a drumbeat of pronouncements in recent days on this theme. Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin made a speech about what he called American financial “irresponsibility” on Wednesday, blaming non-Russian causes for Russia’s stock plunge of more than 50 percent. Of the financial crisis, he said, “This is not the irresponsibility of some people but the irresponsibility of the system, which as it is known, claimed to be the leader.” In contrast to the Europeans who have also criticized lax American regulation, however, Russians are facing a financial system that has been in such chaos that regulators suspended trading on the stock market three times last month. The global credit crisis could trim about 1 percent from Russian growth next year, said the finance minister, Aleksei L. Kudrin.
As in other emerging markets, investors are pulling money out of Russia and depositing it in United States Treasury securities because they are considered the safest place to park money. By the time Mr. Medvedev spoke on Thursday, investors had pulled about $52 billion in net private capital out of Russia since the second week of August, when the war in Georgia and political tension with the West heightened concern about political risk here. The criticism of American finance coincided with a rise in Russian military bluster that has been viewed by some in the West as a resurgence of the Kremlin’s cold-war mentality. On Thursday, Russian generals announced plans for the largest air force exercise since the collapse of the Soviet Union, called Stability 2008, to be held next week. Also on Thursday, the deputy commander of Russia’s navy said the country would build eight new nuclear submarines before 2015.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/wo...russia.html?emAfter Financial Crisis, Uncertainty and Lectures From Abroad
As America’s financial crisis was gathering speed, Brazil’s president seemed dismissive, almost gleeful, about the troubles up north. “What crisis?” said the president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, when asked last month about the financial maelstrom. “Go ask Bush about that.” Like a number of South American countries, Brazil had been flashing a newfound confidence, one born of a deliberate push to decrease political and economic reliance on the United States. But on Monday, shortly after Congress rejected a proposed $700 billion bailout package, Mr. da Silva struck a very different tone, saying in his weekly radio address that Brazil was not immune from the spreading woes after all. “A recessionary crisis in a country like the United States,” he explained to Brazilians, “can bring problems to all countries.” In only a few days, Latin American leaders have gone from schadenfreude to fear. Despite strong economic growth this decade and some aggressive efforts to break free of the American orbit, there is a growing nervousness that once again Latin America cannot escape the globalized connections in the financial sector that run through the United States. After seeming to revel in the collapse of Lehman Brothers, Hugo Chávez, Venezuela’s president, skipped the opening of the United Nations General Assembly last week to visit China instead, saying that Beijing was now much more relevant than New York.
But by Tuesday, after the American stock market plunged nearly 778 points, dragging down Latin American exchanges with it, New York, and Wall Street in particular, had suddenly become relevant once more, with Mr. Chávez saying at a summit meeting in Brazil that the financial crisis would have the force of “one hundred hurricanes.” A number of governments in the region have been working for the past decade to reduce their dependence on the American economy. They have diversified trade with the rest of the world, while also making efforts to save tens, and sometimes hundreds, of billions of dollars for times when international conditions turn sour. As their economies strengthened and their political cooperation took off, it seemed the United States was being rapidly pushed out of the picture. Latin American leaders were standing up to America with growing bravado. In the past month, both Venezuela and Bolivia expelled the American ambassadors to their countries. Not only did Brazil, thought to be among America’s strongest allies in the region, support the expulsion by Bolivia, a major source of natural gas, but Mr. da Silva also railed against an American naval presence in the region, warning that his nation needed to put its own warships on alert in response.
Such anti-American sentiment reflects a longstanding bitterness over Washington’s economic prescriptions for Latin America, policies that some countries in the region blame for undercutting them. As Wall Street itself started to unravel, some leaders seemed to feel vindicated by the collapse. “We are witnessing the First World, which at one point had been painted as a mecca we should strive to reach, popping like a bubble,” Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, Argentina’s president, said two weeks ago. But the financial crisis has exploded far beyond Wall Street. Whipsawing global markets are already having a ripple effect across Latin America. As nervous investors pulled money out of emerging markets, Brazil’s currency, the real, plunged 16 percent against the dollar last month, resulting in hundreds of millions of dollars in losses at large food and eucalyptus-pulp exporters that placed bad bets on the direction of the real. In Mexico, falling remittances from the United States are also raising concern, with Finance Minister Augustín Carstens warning that money sent home from across the border could decline by $2.8 billion, or 8 percent, this year. In Venezuela, a sharp drop in the value of the country’s bonds in the last two weeks reflects fears about plunging oil prices, especially since the United States remains by far the largest buyer of Venezuelan oil despite the deterioration of relations between the countries.
The issue, economists say, is largely about access to credit, which is needed to keep Latin America’s export-oriented economies humming along. “The credit crunch and the liquidity constraints we are seeing are going to affect everyone in the world,” said Alfredo Coutiño, a senior economist at Moody’s, the credit-rating agency. “That means that the cost for Latin American companies, particularly for those with the need for external funds, is going to be higher.” Plummeting commodity prices could also hamper growth in countries like Argentina and Ecuador, while the psychological effect of a crash in the United States is already reverberating through Latin American stock exchanges. That could lead to a reining in of household spending, which has driven much of the recent growth in Brazil’s economy, especially, economists said. Some governments are also directly tied to the American institutions they have derided, as in Venezuela, where the government has lost about $300 million in Lehman-related investments. Ricardo Sanguino, director of the finance committee in Venezuela’s National Assembly, said the losses were minor compared with the Central Bank’s reserves of more than $30 billion and previous decisions to shift some of those reserves into gold and out of American investment banks into Swiss banks. “The crisis affects us because we’re not a completely closed economy, but the impact won’t be disastrous,” Mr. Sanguino said.
With increased fiscal discipline, some countries have built up stabilization funds that should help them weather the fallout from the Wall Street mess, economists said. Brazil’s government has directed its national development bank, the BNDES, to extend $2.5 billion in credit to agricultural exporters for the next harvest to try to prevent a major slowdown. Other countries in the region may struggle more. Before the crisis, foreign investment had already dwindled in Bolivia and Ecuador, where governments flush with revenues before commodities prices began declining had nationalized foreign companies and clashed with multinationals. Argentina, still weighed down by debt, saved much less than Brazil or Chile during its economic expansion. Now it faces declining commodity prices, especially for soybeans, its main export, and will have less flexibility to infuse cash into its industries, analysts said. In recent weeks, the Argentine government, realizing it may face a fiscal shortfall, has been focused on international investors to gain new funds, and has leaned on Venezuela to refinance billions of dollars in debts. But with oil prices plummeting, Venezuela may impose harsher conditions on lending to Argentina. Even before the Wall Street meltdown, the region’s Achilles’ heel — high inflation — was rearing its head in several countries, notably in Venezuela, Bolivia and Argentina. Economists had been warning for months that Argentina could be headed toward a financial crisis of its own if it could not get rising inflation under control.
One silver lining for some countries could be China, which has become a strong export partner for South American soybeans, oil and other commodities. If China’s growth remains robust, the country will continue to lean on Brazil and Argentina for the crop. By traveling to China last month to sign a deal aimed at tripling oil exports to the country, Mr. Chávez may end up reducing his country’s dependence on the American market. “The world will never be the same after this crisis,” Mr. Chávez told reporters in Brazil. “A new world has to emerge, and it is a multipolar world. We are decoupling from the wagon of death.” Other leaders, like Mr. da Silva, have gone from being dismissive of the crisis to outright incensed at Wall Street and Washington for it. “We did what we were supposed to do to get our house in order,” an angry Mr. da Silva said Monday. “They spent years telling us what to do and they themselves didn’t do it.”
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/wo...l?ref=business Merkel Calls U.S. Irresponsible
The U.S. government was irresponsible in regard to world markets when it allowed its largest banks and financial institutions to operate without sufficient oversight, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said at a meeting of conservative leaders in Linz, Austria, the Associated Press reports. "Anyone who makes a real product knows how it is supposed to look and what standards are expected. In financial markets you also need to know what is being traded. Otherwise, things happen that we all end up paying for," Merkel said. Somewhat earlier, in an interview with German media, Merkel said that she sympathizes with people who wonder if the world economy is “fair.” Problems on the mortgage market and interbank crediting practically paralyzed the U.S. financial system earlier this year and caused a number of large companies to close. Federal authorities closed the IndyMac bank, with assets of $32 billion, in July. On September 15, Lehmann Brothers, one of the oldest American investment banks, filed for bankruptcy. The U.S. government nationalized major mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to avoid the collapse of credit markets. Along with the bad news in the United States, a series of painful collapses began around the world. The Russian stock market was rescued from danger by massive financial support from the government and Central Bank.
Source:
http://www.kommersant.com/p-13260/wo...onomic_crisis/ China, Russia Renounce the Dollar?
The recent meeting between Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and his Chinese counterpart, Wen Jiabao, created a financial sensation. Wen said that the two nations could withstand the global financial crisis if they joined forces; Putin urged him to go farther and stop using U.S. dollars in Russian-Chinese settlements. This idea is nothing new. Russia and China reached a "framework" agreement in November 2007, which was followed by China's similar agreement with Belarus. Earlier this year, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez turned against the dollar as well when they asked their OPEC partners to stop using the dollar for oil settlements. They argued that the "green" currency was no longer reliable and it was high time they look for a more stable and predictable alternative. Curiously, unlike the Ahmadinejad and Chavez appeal, Putin's proposal came as the dollar was on the rebound and even began pushing the euro.
Economists even started talking in terms of a reversal of the global currency trends, rather than the temporary appreciation of the dollar. Analysts predict that the dollar will regain its value in the next few months. They do not see anything which could hinder its steady growth. Yet, Putin proposed that Russia and China stop using it as a settlement instrument. What is it - lack of confidence in the dollar's prospects or a political move? Experts differ on this count. Igor Nikolayev, chief strategic analyst at FBK private auditing firm, sounded skeptical: "I think it was a political statement rather than an economic decision. There is a dominant public sentiment that the United States is the source of all evil, so let's stop using the dollar," he explained. One has to bear in mind, though, that some other currency will need to be found to replace the dollar for international settlements. China is unlikely to use the ruble, and Russia would be equally reluctant to accept the yuan. "They could opt for the euro, but its future is uncertain, especially considering current developments on global financial markets. It is also unclear whether China would be happy to start using the euro while most of its international reserves are held in dollars," he added. There are more questions than answers here, Nikolayev concluded. To be objective, one has to admit that other analysts are not as skeptical about the possibility of using other currency units between Russian and Chinese companies. Andrei Marinchenko, director general of the Kalita-Finance company, said the idea was quite realistic. Moreover, he thinks that the ruble stands a good chance of being selected as a reserve currency, primarily because the Chinese are disappointed in the dollar but aren't yet accustomed to the euro.
Only time will show who is right. But to stop using the dollar in Russian-Chinese settlements is too important a decision to make for purely political reasons - that much is obvious. Suppose we do it; what will be the implications for Russian businesses, how will the new financial and political reality affect their incomes and savings? Marinchenko is convinced of a beneficial impact. According to Marinchenko, once the ruble is recognized as a settlement unit, it will enjoy growing demand with Chinese companies and individuals. The Russian currency will consequently grow stronger and more influential globally. Russia will also become immune to many shocks from stock market meltdowns and won't have to fear future devaluation or revaluation of the ruble. It will happen because the role of the U.S. dollar, which has earned a reputation as an unstable and unreliable currency lately, will be much less important.
Source:
http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20081030/118047851.htmlRussia Seeks to Trade Oil for Loans From China
As credit streams from troubled Western banks dry up in the financial crisis, Russian oil companies are negotiating multibillion-dollar loans from a more reliable source: the cash-rich Chinese government. Under a proposed loans-for-oil deal, reported by Reuters on Monday, Russian oil companies would borrow $20 billion to $30 billion from Beijing. In return, they would export about two billion barrels of oil to China over the next 20 years. The Chinese prime minister, Wen Jiabao, was in Moscow on Tuesday for talks with Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin, but there was no indication that the deal had been signed. The agreement would commit Russian companies to redirect some of their energy exports to the East at a time when Russian and Chinese leaders have been saying they would like to see greater integration of their economies, and Russia’s relations with the West are at a low point. It would also offer a prime example of the way the financial crisis is realigning global commerce, directing it away from reliance on Wall Street lending and toward China and Japan, with their enormous cash reserves. It was unclear how close Russia and China were to an agreement.
A planned pipeline to China, a spur of a trans-Siberian pipeline that is under construction, would be capable of carrying about 300,000 barrels of oil a day. On Tuesday, the countries agreed only to build the spur, from the Russian town of Skovorodino to the Chinese border, at a cost of about $800 million. How much oil will flow through the pipeline, and at what cost per barrel, have been matters of contention for some time and have yet to be resolved. There is little doubt that the crushing cash needs of the Russian oil companies helped narrow the differences. Much of the companies’ revenue during the recent spike in oil prices went to taxes. As a result, the state oil company Rosneft owes about $21 billion to Western banks and has already been confronted with demands from creditors for early repayment. China, after years of piling up trade surpluses with the United States, is awash in cash, with currency reserves of $1.9 trillion, the largest in the world. The Russian government, which also has a healthy cash reserve, has pledged $9 billion in loans to its country’s oil companies, but that does not begin to cover their cash needs, which include the enormous sums needed to expand into the more expensive and remote fields in Siberia.
Mr. Wen and Mr. Putin also discussed relying on rubles and yuan in bilateral trade, rather than on dollars. Mr. Putin is an advocate of reducing the dollar’s role in international commerce. “At the moment the world, which is based on the dollar, is suffering serious problems,” he said.
Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/29/wo...=worldbusiness 
Somebody Stop the Planet.....I want to Get Off!
ReplyDelete