Argentina's
implosion has the fingerprints of the International
Monetary Fund all over it.
The first and overwhelmingly most important cause
of the country's economic troubles was the government's
decision to maintain its fixed rate of exchange: one
peso for one U.S. dollar. Adopted in 1991, this policy
worked for a while. But during the past few years
the dollar has been overvalued, which made the peso
overvalued as well.
Contrary to popular belief, a "strong"
currency is not like a strong body. It is very easy
to have too much of a good thing. An overvalued currency
makes exports too expensive and imports artificially
cheap. Just look at the United States, where a "strong"
dollar has brought a record $400 billion trade deficit.
But it gets catastrophically worse for a country
that has committed itself to a fixed exchange rate.
When investors start to believe that the peso is going
to fall, they demand ever higher interest rates. These
exorbitant interest rates are crippling to the economy.
That is the main reason why Argentina has not been
able to recover from four years of recession.
To maintain an overvalued currency, a country needs
large reserves of dollars; the government has to guarantee
that everyone who wants to exchange a peso for a dollar
can get one. The IMF's role here was crucial. It arranged
large loans, including $40 billion a year ago, to
support the peso. This was the IMF's second fatal
error. To appreciate its severity, imagine Washington
borrowing $1.4 trillion - 70 percent of the federal
budget - just to prop up an overvalued dollar. It
didn't take long for Argentina to pile up a foreign
debt that was impossible to pay back.
As if all that were not enough, the IMF made its
loans conditional on a "zero-deficit" policy
in Buenos Aires. But it is neither necessary nor desirable
for a government to balance its budget during a recession,
when tax revenues typically fall and social spending
rises. The zero-deficit target may make little economic
sense, but it has great public relations value. By
focusing on government spending, the IMF has managed
to convince most of the press that Argentina's
"profligate" spending habits are the source
of its troubles. But Argentina has run only modest
budget deficits, much smaller than U.S. deficits
during recessions.
The IMF now claims that it was against the fixed
exchange rate, and the large loans to support
it, all along. Officials say they went along with
these policies to please the Argentine government.
So now Argentina tells the U.S. government what to
do!
This is not a very credible story, but of course
verifying who made what decision is a little
like tracking Qaida's chain of command. IMF board
meetings, consultations with government ministers
and other deliberations are secret.
But they do have a track record. In 1998 the IMF
supported overvalued currencies in Russia and Brazil,
with large loans and sky-high interest rates. In both
cases the currencies collapsed anyway, and both countries
were better off or the devaluation. Russia's growth
in 2000 was its highest in two decades. Argentina
will undoubtedly recover, too, after it devalues its
currency and defaults on its un payable foreign debt.
But the people will need a government that is willing
to break with the IMF and pursue policies which put
their own national interests first.
Washington has other ideas. "It's important
for Argentina to continue to work through the International
Monetary Fund on sound policies," said White
House spokesman Ari Fleischer on Friday. For the IMF,
failure is impossible. The writer is co-director of
the Center for Economic and Policy Research. He contributed
this comment to The Washington Post.
December 26, 2001.
[Source: The International Herald Tribune]
|