Skip to main content

Euro futures

The European sovereign debt crisis has its roots in a variety of long term mistakes. The biggest of which is not the creation of the common currency, but the failure of states to maintain solid public finances. Whether the crisis is the result of a policy mistake- the Irish decision to offer an unlimited guarantee to its banking system- or long term corruption,-the fraudulent Greek public debt numbers- the impact amounts to the same. No matter what, all European states now have no option but to bring their runaway government budgets under control. That is as true for countries outside the Euro zone- such as the UK- as it is for the Euro member states.

However, the structural problem of Euro sovereign debt is now putting the entire mechanism of the Euro under intolerable strain. The European Central Bank, through its large scale purchases of the sovereign debt of the weaker Euro zone members, is placing its own balance sheet at risk, and even now, it is straining its own leverage ratios to a level- estimated at 23 times its capital base- that can not be considered prudent. Any default will force a significant recapitalization onto other Euro zone members

Yet in the last few days, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Greek government is under growing pressure, both domestically and from its Euro-zone partners, to consider the option of a default on debt and a withdrawal from the Euro. The fact is though, that there is no evidence that the the process can be done in an orderly way. The need to create new drachma notes and coins alone is a logistical problem that could take months to solve- and for the plan to work, this must be carried out in secret. Meanwhile the pressure on Athens grows more severe every day. A disorderly default is also a nightmare for the rest of the Eurozone too: not least, as I have written before, for Germany.

Yet, before the anti-EU brigade starts to crow, the next question is: what next?
The fundamental question, however, still remains: how to maintain a common currency without a common treasury? That may yet prove so intractable that the very idea of a common currency evaporates. On the other hand, there is growing talk of new and stronger mechanisms that can be applied across economies that are more alike, and which do not have major debt issues in the first place.

The fact is that the common currency drove interest rates substantially lower and gave far greater access to capital. The complete fall of the Euro would raise rates and reduce liquidity at a time when growth is already under attack from the dramatic retrenchment in government debt that the years of excess have racked up. The Euro has done an awful lot of the good that it promised.

The complete fall of the Euro could take Europe back to the 1930s. That is why the Greek crisis is rapidly becoming a pan-European crisis. In the face of the abyss, some of the politicians are beginning to panic.

Yet, there is also the conundrum of what would happen if Greek withdrawal were actually to take place in an orderly fashion, and that this helped to stabilize the Greek economy? In fact such a stabilization is likely to be many years away, no matter what happens: such is the scale of the crisis today, but let us make an assumption that Greece manages an orderly exit. In such circumstances, would not the pressure on other ill-fitting members lead to the complete breakdown of the currency bloc? I think the answer is that the peripheral states, such as Portugal and Spain may well follow suit, but for Italy and Ireland the message is far less clear. To a great degree the Irish are more likely to be able to complete the policy prescription. In Italy, despite the growing crisis of competitiveness, coupled with the death throes of the Berlusconi (should that be Burlesque-oni?) era, the country remains fundamentally much stronger than its club-Med peers.

The fact remains that a Euro is likely to survive.

That may be a Euro pared back to its core: Germany, Austria, BeNeLux, Finland, Estonia, Slovakia and Slovenia say: a Greater D-Mark; or with the continued participation of France, Italy and Ireland, it may remain something quite like the Euro we know today.

In the face of what is happening, some very cool heads indeed are now needed, yet the transfer of authority in the IMF with the exit of DSK and the ECB itself with the forthcoming exit of Jean-Claude Trichet makes the question of leadership in the crisis itself a tricky question ("who voted for Mario Draghi?" is a question already being posed by journalists).

However, even a default and Euro exit of Greece or indeed the gamut of the PIIGS states, would most likely still leave the Euro in existence: shorn of its more prickly weaker members, it may even face an new situation: the problem of too much strength.

Hold on to your hat, it is going to be a very bumpy ride in the next few weeks.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...