Pieria
http://www.pieria.co.uk/articles/grexit_end_of_the_illusion
Posted by John Weeks on Jun 15th 2015,
That is the
real story. It is very simple - force the Greek government to withdraw in
circumstances that allow the Troika to deny culpability. Without knowing it, we
have been following the manoeuvres by the Troika to achieve that end. The
drawn-out nature of the conflict is a Troika strategy, to drain the Greek
government of money until it must accept what Prime Minister called
"absurd" demands or choose an increasingly costly exit from the euro
zone.
Time is not
on the side of the Greek government.
Sham
negotiation
It is
standard international practice that governments accept responsibility for
debts contracted by previous governments. But they are not obligated to implement
the same policies. Unless a debt is illegal or "odious", a new
government is expected to pay it under the contracted interest rate, time
schedule and other terms, though it may attempt to re-negotiate those terms.
Domestic politics determine how it does so.
Shortly
prior to calling an election for January, the centre-right Greek government
that preceded Syriza signed an agreement with the Troika that made
disbursements dependent on many specific policy conditionalities. These
conditionalities were in effect the extension of the policies that the Troika
had required four years previously, which led to the resignation of the
Papandreou government and its replacement without a new election by what many
critics, including this author, consider a Troika client regime.
These
conditionalities did not relate directly to the debts owed by the Greek
government. They involved specific
policy interventions that the Troika designed, and justified on the grounds the
measures would facilitate debt service, debt reduction and economic recovery.
When the January 2015 election occurred the Greek economy had achieved none of
the goals or targets of the Troika policy conditionalities. A trade surplus
represented the only "success" of the Troika policy package, and this
was achieved by the collapse of household income and imports, not a
"competitiveness" driven export surge.
The Syriza
Party's platform explicitly rejected the most important of these
conditionalities. Therefore, there can be no dispute that the Greek electorate
provided a democratic mandate to the new government to change policy. This was
not a unique or even an unusual situation. Numerous governments in Asia, Africa
and Latin America have renegotiated conditionalities associated with IMF and
World Bank lending, including ones by governments that I have advised (Zambia
over the last ten years is a clear example).
Operating
on standard international practice, the Syriza government sent its
representatives to Brussels
in February 2015 with a detailed proposal for debt servicing consistent with
its electoral mandate. The normal reaction by creditors and debt monitoring
institutions would have been to agree to some proposals and reject others.
Because almost all the Greek government debt had been converted to obligations
to the European Central Bank and the IMF, the "creditors" consisted
of the ECB and the IMF, with the finance ministers of the other euro zone
countries in effect serving as the European Commission's policy monitors.
Throughout
the contentious exchanges, media reports suggested that some among the Troika
initially took the positive approach of "decide what is essential, hold to
that, and yield on the small stuff". This, the modus operandi of
negotiations, frequently reveals that what one side considers important the
other does not, which makes for compromises.
The German
government did not take the usual approach. As early as mid-February, the Greek
Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis accused the "creditor" governments
of a lack of flexibility. German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble repeatedly
and explicitly confirmed Varoufakis, perhaps most bluntly in April when this
right-wing German politician stated publicly that "no one expects there
will be a solution".
Evidence
suggests that differences may have emerged among that the members of the
Troika. Given that euro zone finance ministers numbered well into double
digits, complete agreement seems unlikely. One of the more popular rumours, for
which there is little supporting evidence, held that the EC president
Jean-Claude Juncker was the "good cop" to Wolfgang Schäuble's
"bad cop".
Another
rumour speculated that the IMF was flexible on debt rescheduling but not on
policy conditionalities (publicly denied by the head of the IMF), with the
reverse position held by the ECB and the finance ministers. The inconsistencies
among these rumours suggest to me that they were part of an orchestrated
campaign to generate the illusion of Troika flexibility and Greek government
intransigence.
Whatever
the position of the various Troika members, the first day of June brought
perhaps the most extraordinary single event during the sham negotiations, a
secret Troika meeting in Berlin .
According to the Financial Times this clandestine gathering sought "to
thrash out differences between [Greece 's]
bailout monitors". To quote from the FT,
"Christine
Lagarde, the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, and Mario
Draghi, head of the European Central Bank, arrived secretly in Berlin on Monday to join France’s President François
Hollande and European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker, who were
already in Berlin
for a pre-arranged meeting with the German chancellor."
If any
hopes remained that the faux negotiations had a positive purpose they should have
ended on 2 June. This cloak-and-dagger gathering of the major members of the
Troika, in the absence of the finance minister bit players, demonstrated who
was in charge. When the heavy weights of the Troika allowed no representative
from the Greek government to attend - indeed, did not inform the Greek
government of the meeting - the political logic of the new EU order revealed
itself.
Euro
expulsion or euro escape?
Grexit to
the leftFrom that secret meeting came a Troika document of a few pages that was
formally passed to the Greek government. The only surprising aspect of that
document is its excessive length, because it conveyed a very short and clear
message - implement the pre-election economic policies that we, the Troika,
designed and to which previous governments acquiesced.
At the
beginning of June the Greek government had a payment to make to the IMF. Given
the inflexibility of the Troika, the announcement by the Greek government to
use a procedural device within IMF rule to postpone payment is the rational
response. I do not interpret this as a move of desperation by a
"cash-strapped, bankrupt" government. Rather, it reflects the need to
conserve euros for the long-expected transition to a national currency, when
the euro like the dollar will be part of the government's foreign exchange
reserves.
The Greek
public debt cannot be paid in full and will not be. Even the cast-iron
austerian Wolfgang Schäuble must know that.
Greek government submission to the neoliberal EU project or forced exit
was the Troika game plan from the moment Syriza formed a government.
Soon the
negotiations that-never-were will no longer be. The challenge facing the Greek
government will be to convert expulsion from the euro zone into escape from
neoliberal Europe .
Originally
published on Open Democracy.
No comments:
Post a Comment