By Clive Crook
If Europe’s new plan for Greece succeeds, nobody will be more surprised than the politicians who
designed it. At best, the arrangement is a holding action, one that fails yet
again to deal with the much larger confidence crisis facing the euro area.
The deal announced on Tuesday starts with private
lenders. Their representatives agreed to accept even bigger losses on Greek government bonds than previously discussed. The bonds’ face value
will be cut by 53.5 percent, and they’ll pay a low interest rate, starting at 2
percent then rising later. Altogether, this reduces their net present value by
about 75 percent, far more than deemed necessary just weeks ago.
If enough private lenders go along, that triggers the inter-governmental side of the plan: new official loans to cover Greece’s ongoing budget deficit and replace debt coming due. The terms include a lower interest rate on bailout loans as well as various other kinds of European Union taxpayer subsidy, folded in with greater or lesser degrees of stealth. The European Central Bank and national central banks, for example, will pitch in by channeling back to Greece the “profits” they have made on Greek bonds bought at deep discounts to face value. The International Monetary Fund is going to take part, too. Exactly how still isn’t clear.
Drawing Board
If too many private lenders opt out, it’s back to the
drawing board. Ditto if voters in Greece force the government to renege on
promises to cut the minimum wage, make advance debt- service payments into an
externally monitored account, change the constitution to prioritize debt
repayment, accept oversight of public accounts by an on-site team of EU officials, and more.
That’s only a partial list of what might still derail
the agreement. Even if it sticks, its designers don’t sound confident it will
work. An official analysis leaked to the Financial Times discusses a “tailored
downside scenario,” which, to many observers, looks more like a plausible
central case.
In this projection, Greece postpones the structural
changes -- such as a lowering of wages -- needed to make its economy competitive.
Fiscal adjustment and privatization are delayed. The government’s dependence on
official loans grows, and its debt burden surges higher. The debt trajectory would be
“extremely sensitive to program delays,” the officials conclude, “suggesting
that the program could be accident prone, and calling into question
sustainability.”
Sounds like business as usual. All through this
crisis, the EU has chosen to keep muddling through, never doing quite enough to
resolve the problem, infusing each round of subsequent crisis-management with
high political drama. Advocates of this method argue, with a particle of
justification, that it’s working. Unilateral default has been avoided and
pressure has been brought to bear on Greece and others to push ahead with
economic reforms that were long overdue.
If there is some intelligent principle behind this
approach, rather than mere flailing incompetence, it would sound like this:
“Let’s build this manageable problem up into a crisis capable of vast
destruction that we might be unable to control. That will create the fear
needed to force some real improvements in economic policy.”
Panic is what first turned an EU liquidity crisis
(where governments struggle to borrow money) into an insolvency crisis (where
the burden of debt settles on an unavoidably explosive path). This financial
metastasis works through interest rates. If rates stay high enough for long enough, they can
make solvent governments insolvent. When panic gripped the markets recently and
bond yields surged, the solvency of Spain and Italy -- plainly capable of servicing their debts
under conditions of no panic -- was called into question. It beggars belief
that the EU is willing to let the fear of a calamity on such a scale persist,
when there’s no need.
Maximizing Panic
But it has been willing, and still is. The EU’s own
financial officials doubt the new program will work. Greece may end up
defaulting unilaterally -- the panic-maximizing event. Lately finance ministers
have actually entertained the idea of a Greek exit from the euro as a way of
bringing further pressure to bear on the government. Are plans in place for
that contingency? Take a guess. If it happens, and bond yields spike again,
there’s no firewall to protect the rest of the system. Europe’s banks are still undercapitalized and the European Financial Stability
Facility is at best a third as big as it might need to be.
Greece is small enough for the rot to be stopped right
there. Add in Europe’s other two acutely distressed economies -- Ireland and
Portugal -- and the problem is still manageable.
Greece’s debts, official and privately held, should be
written off. Until its government can get to a primary budget surplus or renew its access to market borrowing -- for
which it needs some economic growth -- Europe should provide official financing
on terms that won’t kill the economy. Euro exit must be avoided: Wages will
have to fall, but dumping the common currency for a devalued drachma opens too
many new channels of risk. The EU should stand ready, if need be, to do all
this for Ireland and Portugal, as well.
In any event banks have to be recapitalized and the
EFSF greatly enlarged. If all this were done, the risk of renewed panic would
subside, and Spain, Italy and the EU as a whole would be moved back from the
brink of disaster. The cost to euro-area taxpayers is not small, but it’s
nothing compared with the crash they will suffer if this game of chicken with
financial markets goes wrong.
What part of this doesn’t Europe understand?
No comments:
Post a Comment