Cyprus's dramatic choice
The troika plan presented to Cyprus would ruin the economy, and start a run on
banks that may spread elsewhere
Costas Lapavitsas
Guardian.co.uk, 19 March 2013
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/19/cyprus-troika-plan

[Costas Lapavitsas wrote this article before the latest events in Cyprus, where
MPs have rejected the bailout terms]

Cyprus is a small island economy with a hugely oversized banking system, and is
thus similar to both Iceland and Ireland. Banks in Iceland speculated on
derivatives; Irish banks gambled in real estate; Cypriot banks made large loans
to the Greek government and Greek businesses. In all three, banks failed
systemically and threatened the whole of the economy.

Still, Cyprus banks are small beer and did not pose a risk to international
finance by themselves. The danger has arisen because of the troika of the EU,
the ECB and the IMF. For a start, Cypriot banks have failed mostly because of
troika policies. The troika obliged the Greek state to apply a haircut to its
bonds in 2012. Troika policies also forced the Greek economy into depression in
2010-12, making it impossible for businesses and households to repay their
debts.

When banks fail in a systemic way, the policy options are few. Ireland followed
a certain path, determined by the troika and membership of the EMU. It supported
its banks by using public funds, and protected large bondholders, who were other
European banks. Irish public debt rose and the country faced austerity,
privatisation and liberalisation. The result was a long-drawn out recession,
falling incomes, and persistent unemployment. In effect, the costs of failed
banks were brazenly shifted onto society as a whole.

Iceland followed a radically different path, as it is free of the troika and not
a member of the EMU. It refused to increase its national debt and it thus let
banks go bankrupt, shifting the costs on to shareholders, bondholders and
depositors abroad. Iceland looked after small depositors, but also allowed its
currency to devalue and applied capital controls. The country avoided a deep and
protracted recession, and last year the economy grew at 2.5%.

The deal currently offered to Cyprus by the troika is along the path of Ireland
– except much worse. Cypriot banks need €17bn; the troika is proposing that the
Cypriot state should increase its borrowing by €10bn
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/17/cyprus-savings-levy-questions-and-answers>
and that the rest should be obtained mostly by imposing a levy on deposits. This
is a terrible plan.

The extra borrowing will raise Cypriot public debt well over 100% of GDP. The
economy is already in recession and, with the extra austerity measures,
including the inevitable blow to bank credit, contraction might be around 5%
this year. It is likely that the increased national debt will need restructuring
in the near future, meaning fresh loans and even more austerity.

The worst aspect of the plan, however, is the levy on deposits. In part, it is
morally offensive as small depositors are merely savers who also use the money
services of the banks. Why should they be charged for failed bank loans? But
much worse is the plan's recklessness. Banks engage in a confidence trick:
depositors must believe that their money is safe because, if they did not, they
would rush to withdraw it and banks would go bankrupt. To harm the confidence of
depositors is to invite a bank run, which might be panicky, as in the case of
Northern Rock, or silent, if large depositors simply left.

As things stand, it is almost certain that there will be a bank run in Cyprus
when the banks reopen, and hence the government has declared a bank holiday. The
repercussions in Greece, where Cypriot banks also have large deposits, and in
other countries of the eurozone can only be guessed. What is beyond dispute is
that a precedent has been created in the EMU and depositors in peripheral
countries with weak banks will take note. Bank runs can run for several days and
panic can spread.

The troika proposed these measures because it did not wish to rescue large
Russian depositors, some with shady backgrounds. This is certainly laudable, but
the cure is worse than the disease. The plan will ruin the Cypriot economy,
while delivering an extraordinary shock to confidence in European banks.

Cyprus now has a very tough decision to take. It is clear that it can expect no
real solidarity from the EU, while being subjected to unfair rules that do not
apply to anyone else. If it submitted to the plan, it would be entering a long
and dark tunnel. But it could also reject it, seeking a different path. Above
all, it must not be bullied by the fear of exiting the EMU. The country has
other options, including shifting its international alliances. If it chose to
reject the plan, the experience of Iceland would stand it in good stead. The
arrogant and blinkered establishment of the EMU might at last take notice.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to