Mark Blyth was on the NPR program On the Media yesterday. It was a great
performance.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/greece/2015-07-07/pain-athens

Tuesday, July 7, 2015
A Pain in the Athens
Why Greece Isn't to Blame for the Crisis
Mark Blyth

MARK BLYTH is Eastman Professor of Political Economy at Brown University.

When the anti-austerity party Syriza came to power in Greece in January
2015, Cornel Ban and I wrote in a *Foreign Affairs*
<https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/greece/2015-01-29/austerity-vs-democracy-greece>
 [1] article that, at some point, Europe was bound to face an Alexis
Tsipras, the party’s leader and Greek prime minister, “because there’s only
so long you can ask people to vote for impoverishment today based on
promises of a better tomorrow that never arrives.” Despite attempts by the
eurogroup, the European Central Bank, and the International Monetary Fund
since February 2015 to harangue Greece into ever more austerity, the Greeks
voted by an even bigger margin than they voted for Syriza to say “no” once
more. So the score is now democracy 2, austerity 0. But now what? To answer
that question, we need to be clear about what this crisis is and what it is
not. Surprisingly, despite endless lazy moralizing commentary
<https://www.wnyc.org/radio/#/ondemand/515485> [2] to the contrary, Greece
has very little to do with the crisis that bears its name. To see why, it
is best to follow the money—and those who bank it.

The roots of the crisis lie far away from Greece; they lie in the
architecture of European banking
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/04/08/the-one-book-you-need-to-read-about-the-eurozone/>
 [3]. When the euro came into existence in 1999, not only did the Greeks
get to borrow like the Germans, everyone’s banks got to borrow and lend in
what was effectively a cheap foreign currency. And with super-low rates,
countries clamoring to get into the euro, and a continent-wide credit boom
underway, it made sense for national banks to expand private lending as far
as the euro could reach.

So European banks’ asset footprints (loans and other assets) expanded
massively throughout the first decade of the euro, especially into the
European periphery. Indeed, according the Bank of International Settlements
<http://www.bis.org/publ/qtrpdf/r_qt1006.pdf> [4], by 2010 when the crisis
hit, French banks held the equivalent of nearly 465 billion euros in
so-called impaired periphery assets, while German banks had 493 billion on
their books. Only a small part of those impaired assets were Greek, and
here’s the rub: Greece made up two percent of the eurozone in 2010, and
Greece’s revised budget deficit that year was 15 percent of the country’s
GDP—that’s 0.3 percent of the eurozone’s economy. In other words, the Greek
deficit was a rounding error, not a reason to panic. Unless, of course, the
folks holding Greek debts, those big banks in the eurozone core, had, over
the prior decade, grown to twice the size (in terms of assets) of—and with
operational leverage ratios (assets divided by liabilities) twice as high
as—their “too big to fail” American counterparts, which they had done
<http://www.amazon.com/Austerity-The-History-Dangerous-Idea/dp/0199389446>
[5]. In such an over-levered world, if Greece defaulted, those banks would
need to sell other similar sovereign assets to cover the losses. But all
those sell contracts hitting the market at once would trigger a bank run
throughout the bond markets of the eurozone that could wipe out core
European banks
<http://www.businessinsider.com/european-banks-praying-for-solution-euro-crisis-2011-11>
 [6].

Clearly something had to be done to stop the rot, and that something was
the troika program for Greece
<http://www.bruegel.org/publications/publication-detail/publication/815-the-troika-and-financial-assistance-in-the-euro-area-successes-and-failures/>
 [7], which succeeded in stopping the bond market bank run—keeping the
Greeks in and the yields down—at the cost of making a quarter of Greeks
unemployed and destroying nearly a third of the country’s GDP.
Consequently, Greece is now just 1.7 percent of the eurozone, and the
standoff of the past few months has been over tax and spending mixes of a
few billion euros. Why, then, was there no deal for Greece, especially when
the IMF’s own research
<https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2011/wp11158.pdf> [8] has said
that these policies are at best counterproductive, and how has such a small
economy managed to generate such a mortal threat to the euro?

Part of the story, as we wrote in January
<https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/greece/2015-01-29/austerity-vs-democracy-greece>
 [1], was the political risk that Syriza presented, which threatened to
embolden other anti-creditor coalitions across Europe, such as Podemos in
Spain. But another part lay in what the European elites buried deep within
their supposed bailouts for Greece. Namely, the bailouts weren’t for Greece
at all. They were bailouts-on-the-quiet for Europe’s big banks, and
taxpayers in core countries are now being stuck with the bill since the
Greeks have refused to pay. It is this hidden game that lies at the heart
of Greece’s decision to say “no” and Europe’s inability to solve the
problem.

Greece was given two bailouts
<http://www.bruegel.org/publications/publication-detail/publication/815-the-troika-and-financial-assistance-in-the-euro-area-successes-and-failures/>
 [7]. The first lasted from May 2010 through June 2013 and consisted of a
30 billion euro–Stand By Agreement from the IMF and 80 billion euro in
bilateral loans from other EU governments. The second lasted from 2012
until the end of 2014 (in practice, it lasted until a few days ago) and
comprised another 19.8 billion euro from the IMF and another 144.7 billion
euro disbursed from an entity set up in late 2010 called the European
Financial Stability Facility (EFSF, now the European Stability Mechanism,
ESM). Not all of these funds were disbursed. The final figure “loaned” to
Greece was around 230 billion euro.

The EFSF <http://www.efsf.europa.eu/attachments/faq_en.pdf> [9] was a
company the EU set up in Luxemburg “to preserve financial stability in
Europe’s economic and monetary union” by issuing bonds to the tune of 440
billion euro that would generate loans to countries in trouble. So what did
they do with that funding? They raised bonds to bail Greece’s creditors—the
banks of France and Germany mainly—via loans to Greece. Greece was thus a
mere conduit for a bailout. It was not a recipient in any significant way,
despite what is constantly repeated in the media. Of the roughly 230
billion euro disbursed to Greece, it is estimated that only 27 billion
<http://www.macropolis.gr/?i=portal.en.the-agora.2080&?ftcamp=crm/email/_DATEYEARFULLNUM___DATEMONTHNUM___DATEDAYNUM__/nbe/MartinSandbusFreeLunch/product>
 [10] went toward keeping the Greek state running. Indeed, by 2013 Greece
was running a surplus and did not need such financing. Accordingly, 65
percent of the loans to Greece went straight through Greece to core banks
for interest payments, maturing debt, and for domestic bank
recapitalization demanded by the lenders. By another accounting, 90 percent
of the “loans to Greece” bypassed Greece entirely
<http://jubileedebt.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Six-key-points-about-Greek-debt_01.15.pdf>
 [11].

Telling though those numbers are, they still miss the fact that, after
Mario Draghi took over from Jean Claude Trichet at the ECB in late 2011,
Draghi dumped around 1.2 trillion euro of public money into the European
banking system to bring down yields in the Long Term Refinancing Operations
(LTROs
<http://lexicon.ft.com/Term?term=long_term-refinancing-operation-_-ltro>
[12]). Bond yields went down and bond prices soon went up. This delighted
bondholders, who got to sell their now LTRO-boosted bonds back to the
governments that had just bailed them out. In March 2012, the Greek
government, under the auspices of the troika, launched a buy-back scheme
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_sector_involvement> [13] that bought
out creditors, private and national central banks, at a 53.4 percent
discount to the face value of the bond. In doing so, 164 billion euro of
debt was handed over from the private sector to the EFSF. That debt now
sits in the successor facility to the EFSF, the European Stability
Mechanism, where it causes much instability
<http://www.efsf.europa.eu/about/operations/the%20efsf%20and%20greece.htm>
[14]. So if we want to understand why the combined powers of the eurozone
can’t deal with a problem the size of a U.S. defense contract overrun, it’s
probably wise to start here and not with corrupt Greeks
<http://pogiblog.atlatszo.hu/2015/06/27/corrupt-lazy-greeks-debunking-ethnic-stereotyping-substituting-economics/>
 [15] or Swabian housewives’
<http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21595503-views-economics-euro-and-much-else-draw-cultural-archetype-hail-swabian>
 [16] financial wisdom. As former Bundesbank Chief Karl Otto Pöhl admitted
<http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/greeces-debt-burden-the-truth-finally-emerges>
 [17], the whole shebang “was about protecting German banks, but especially
the French banks, from debt write-offs.”

Think about it this way. If 230 billion euro had been given to Greece, it
would have amounted to just under 21,000 euros per person. Given such
largess, it would have been impossible to generate a 25 percent
unemployment rate among adults, over 50 percent unemployment among youth, a
sharp increase in elderly poverty, and a near collapse of the banking
system—even with the troika’s austerity package in place.

To fix the problem, someone in core Europe is going to have to own up to
all of the above and admit that their money wasn’t given to lazy Greeks but
to already-bailed bankers who, despite a face-value haircut, ended up
making a profit on the deal. Doing so would, however, also entail admitting
that by shifting, quite deliberately, responsibility from reckless lenders
to irresponsible (national) borrowers, Europe regenerated exactly the type
of petty nationalism, in which moral Germans face off against corrupt
Greeks, that the EU was designed to eliminate. And owning up to that,
especially when mainstream parties’ vote shares
<https://www.thetrumpet.com/article/11802.31955.0.0/britain/angry-voters-reject-mainstream-parties-in-eu-elections>
 [18] are dwindling and parties such as Syriza are ascendant, simply isn’t
going to happen. So what is?

Despite Germany being a serial defaulter that received debt relief four
times in the twentieth century
<http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/927efd1e-9c32-11e4-b9f8-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3fDBs0S4W>
 [19], Chancellor Angela Merkel is not about to cop to bailing out D-Bank
and pinning it on the Greeks. Neither is French President Francois Hollande
or anyone else. In short, the possibilities for a sensible solution are
fading by the day, and the inevitability of Grexit looms large. It is
telling that Tsipras and his colleagues repeatedly used the phrase “48
hours”—sometimes “72 hours”—as the deadline for getting a new deal with
creditors once the vote was in. This number referred to how long Greek
banks could probably stay solvent once the score went to 2-0.

At the time of writing, the ECB is not only violating its own statutes
<http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/3/bbf26c42-23bb-11e5-bd83-71cb60e8f08c.html#axzz3fDBs0S4W>
 [20] by limiting emergency liquidity assistance to Greek banks, but is
also raising the haircuts on Greek collateral
<http://www.ft.com/intl/fastft/355591/ecb-adjusts-haircuts-on-greek-bank-collateral>
 [21]offered for new cash. In other words, the ECB, far from being an
independent central bank, is acting as the eurogroup’s enforcer, despite
the risk that doing so poses to the European project as a whole. We’ve
never understood Greece because we have refused to see the crisis for what
it was—a continuation of a series of bailouts for the financial sector that
started in 2008 and that rumbles on today. It’s so much easier to blame the
Greeks and then be surprised when they refuse to play along with the
script.
===

Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
[email protected]
(202) 448-2898 x1
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to