Emerging economies having bigger say in global affairs inevitable; G7 resurrection notion stupid: father of BRICS

 New cooperation path

Jim O'Neill, a renowned British economist Photo: Xie Wenting/GT

Editor's Note:

The 15th BRICS Summit will be held in Johannesburg, South Africa, from August 22 to 24, 2023. At this year's meeting, the feasibility of a common BRICS currency, the internationalization of the Chinese Yuan, the growth prospects of emerging economies such as China, and the role of the BRICS in global governance will be the focal points of discussion.

With these questions in mind, Global Times reporters Xie Wenting and Bai Yunyi (GT) recently interviewed Jim O'Neill (O'Neill), a renowned British economist and former commercial secretary to the UK Treasury, who is also known as the "father of BRICS." In 2001, O'Neill first proposed the concept of "BRICS" and predicted that the share of BRICS countries in the global economy would rise significantly, hence earning him his title. In the interview, the British economist told the Global Times that the idea of expecting the G7 to play a greater role in global governance is stupid. Despite facing geopolitical challenges, emerging economies will inevitably have a greater say in global affairs.

GT: You are widely viewed as the "father of BRICS" in China. As the 15th BRICS Summit is set to take place in South Africa, what are your expectations for the upcoming summit? How do you assess the future development of the BRICS?

O'Neill: There has been a lot of discussion about this BRICS Summit for several months. So they have allowed expectations to rise about, in particular, one thing, which is an expansion of the BRICS group into being BRICS plus.

The main issue will be how many countries will actually become members of the BRICS plus. But now it is not clear to me regarding the expansion and what are the [membership] criteria. At the summit, these questions may be addressed.

Sometimes people have said to me: Why did you create this acronym, because they [member countries] don't have anything in common. That's not true. They all have a huge number of people and a lot of challenges with infectious diseases. I think the BRICS countries should enhance cooperation in areas such as public health and climate change.

I am optimistic about the development of the BRICS because of its potential. Over the course of the nearly 40 years that I have been observing China, it usually ends up doing the right thing. Additionally, due to India's remarkable demographics, these two countries emerge as the most crucial components within the BRICS framework.

Ultimately, China's massive economic size looms prominently, being twice as large as the combined total of the others. Thus, the real determinant of aggregate growth performance resides in the trajectories of China and India.

Among the BRICS nations, Brazil, Russia, and South Africa face daunting challenges such as over-reliance on commodities. They must embark on reform initiatives.

GT: De-dollarization is currently a hot topic. How do you view the prospects of a de-dollarization in the world? How do you view the prospect of using RMB in trade settlements between the BRICS countries?

O'Neill: I do think it is the case and this discussion has been had for over 20 years. The world is too dependent on the dollar. Every country in the world has to suffer the consequences of the economic cycle. The Federal Reserve Board is grappling with monetary policy matters, which align with the Fed's responsibilities, given that its mandates pertain to domestic US policy. However, this approach may not always align with the specific domestic requirements of many emerging economies, potentially subjecting them to a cycle that doesn't suit their individual needs.

Hence, the case for having a more balanced monetary system is really quite strong. The obvious contender from the BRICS group to play a bigger role is the RMB. I think the idea of the RMB becoming a more prominent invoicing currency for trade and gaining increased status as a reserve currency within the BRICS holds significant merit. However, the realization of this notion hinges upon the willingness of Chinese policymakers, including the People's Bank of China, to make it happen.

The discussion of the internationalization of the RMB has been around for 20 years, ever since the early days of the BRICS and since China played a crucial role in bringing around the end of the Asian financial crisis in 1998. In fact, I admire the slowness in which the Chinese authorities have allowed the rise of the RMB. You want to make sure that your domestic financial markets are sufficiently developed, especially the interest rate market before you allow your currency to be traded a lot more around the world. China has to allow for the growth of the RMB financial markets based on its own domestic needs.

GT: You once argued that the G7 is a zero. You said that since its creation, the G7 has become increasingly irrelevant in a world of new emerging powers. An institution that excludes the BRICS while still including economic basket cases like Italy cannot possibly claim the legitimacy required to exercise global economic leadership. But some observers have noted that the role of the G7 in global governance is reemerging, while the influence of the BRICS and G20 is decreasing. How do you view this perspective?

O'Neill: I think it's a bit crazy. It is indeed the case that since US President Joe Biden came to power, the US has sought to elevate the role of the G7 among the so-called advanced countries. Therefore, there is greater enthusiasm among certain G7 members regarding their capabilities. They're all democracies, and they're all reasonably developed so they find it easy to meet and talk. However, the G7 faces numerous dilemmas stemming from a central issue: Their diminishing share in the global economy.

Japan and Italy have had hardly any growth for 20 years. Germany also doesn't grow very well. And the UK has hardly grown at all since the financial crisis. In fact, the G7 now is a club increasingly dominated economically by the US. Certainly, when it comes to global issues - be it global economic challenges, climate change, infectious diseases, or any other truly global concern - it is impossible for the G7 to effectively address these matters.

I am very disappointed that the G7 has developed this idea that it has resurrected itself, because it is stupid. What we need to do is to renew efforts to make the G20, which was a fantastic creation of the financial crisis because it has the BRICS and all the G7 in it to be the center of global policy-making again.

An aerial view of Johannesburg, South Africa Photo: IC

GT: Given the current geopolitical challenges, do you maintain your optimism that future organizations like the G20 will incorporate a greater representation of emerging economies and play a more influential role in global governance?

O'Neill: I am more optimistic because I think it's inevitable. If you look at the history of the world over the long term, usually the most important countries are the ones that have the biggest say about global affairs. I am from the UK, and in the century prior to the last 100 years, the UK held the most dominant influence in global affairs, a reflection of Britain's economic history. This shifted when the US grew significantly larger.

As more emerging economies become bigger and bigger, it seems inevitable that they will have a bigger say in global affairs, despite some of the geopolitical challenges that go with it.

GT: Do you believe that emerging economies have the potential to remain substantial drivers of the global economy, both now and in the future?

O'Neill: Yes is the answer. Currently, China holds the position of the world's second-largest economy in nominal terms and the largest in PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) terms. Over the next few years, India is poised to challenge Germany for the fourth-largest spot, having already surpassed France and the UK. The combined growth trajectories of China and India exert the most significant impact on global GDP.

Several other emerging economies, notably Indonesia and Vietnam, are also gaining prominence in Asia. In Latin America, Mexico, and in Africa, though from a significantly lower starting point, countries such as Nigeria, Ethiopia, and Egypt are steadily gaining importance in the global economy. However, among the five BRICS countries, three have not demonstrated strong economic performance for over a decade. I am skeptical that their fortunes will change unless they embark on substantial economic reforms aimed at diminishing their reliance on volatile commodity prices.

GT: What is your perspective on the role that China plays in the advancement of global economic growth?

O'Neill: As China is having grown so rapidly and substantially, the current situation underscores that what happens to China in the upcoming year holds significance for the global economy. Many countries worldwide are greatly influenced by China, from South Korea to developed Western countries like Germany.

I think the confidence of Chinese individuals is not as high as it was for the last three decades. Chinese policymakers need to listen, understand, and take action to specifically enhance the role of consumption. I read that there is discussion regarding additional policies which I hope could happen.

Chinese consumption, as a proportion of shared GDP, remains excessively low. But Chinese savings persist at levels that are disproportionately high. Chinese policymakers must identify the appropriate stimulus to instill greater confidence among the populace, thereby promoting increased spending.

GT: We seem to be entering an era of "tech decoupling" and "technological nationalism," with the US, for example, imposing restrictions on selling certain high-tech products to China. What impacts could this trend have on the global economy?

O'Neill: As an economist, I find it hard to take these populist measures very seriously. We all live on the same planet. The notion that the US and China could entirely decouple from one another is stupid. When considering balance of payments and countries' savings rates, if the US saves too little, it consequently needs to source capital from the international community. This situation inevitably leads to a trade deficit with the rest of the world, as dictated by the accounting identity of the balance of payments.

Consider the following theoretical scenario: If the US were to enact a prohibition on importing anything from China, for instance, the result would be the US importing those same items from other countries. Simultaneously, those other countries would import those goods from China.

In my opinion, the so-called decoupling is merely a populist political notion that lacks any logical basis.

Source link

RELATED ARTICLES

Chinese commerce minister has called on BRICS members to strengthen cooperation, injecting impetus into global economic recovery

China called on BRICS members to strengthen cooperation and uphold multilateralism in trade, injecting impetus into the global ...

BRICS to deepen cooperation on currency

As a growing number of emerging economies and developing countries are reeling from the US' consecutive rates hikes ...

US Fed's hawkish tone on tightening sparks global concerns as country becomes 'bomb' for global economy

US politicians, including President Joe Biden, and some mainstream media have recently launched a smearing campaign against China's economy,

'Navigational freedom' in S. China Sea a political fallacy aimed at expanding US hegemony: experts

The US has played up its hyping of the South China Sea, accusing B

President Xi to attend BRICS summit in South Africa

The first offline BRICS Summit held in over three years will be held in Johannesburg, South Africa next week, and ..

China Cancels 50 Billion Chip Orders, Set to Develop Its Own 'ASML' ！

The United States has always exercised technological hegemony, using various means to suppress foreign companies that surpass American enterprises or pose a threat to them. This has been the case with Japan's semiconductor industry, French energy giants, and others.

In the era of 5G, Huawei is leading in 5G technology, with the highest number of patents globally and being the only company capable of providing end-to-end 5G services. Moreover, its 5G chip technology is also leading globally.,,,,,

Related posts:

BRICS summit kicks off, calls grow for parallel payment system to counter US hegemony

 

BRICS establish Development Bank US$100bil in Shanghai to cut out Western dominance

BRICS change the world: doing development differently

Be ready – financial crisis is near

Prepare Now for the Next Financial Crisis

THE financial crisis affecting developing countries arrived in full-scale fashion in our region last week when the Indonesian economy experienced shocks reminiscent of the Asian crisis 20 years ago.

With the crisis coming so close to home, it is time to contemplate what may unfold in the near future and list measures to respond to each scenario, so that we are not taken by surprise.

The agreement reached with Singa­pore to postpone construction of the Kuala Lumpur-Singapore high-speed rail (HSR) project until end-May 2020 (with Malaysia paying S$15mil [RM45.1mil] in cost) was an achievement. It allows us a gap of two years before having to meet the mega project’s large expenses.

The next couple of years will be crucial, as the country will be in the midst of managing the “perfect storm” of servicing the trillion-ringgit government debt and preventing the government deficit from ballooning, while facing the challenges of the emerging global financial crisis.

In this tight situation, every billion ringgit counts; indeed every single ringgit counts.

As more discoveries are made of missing money, whether due to the 1MDB scandal or unpaid tax refunds, there is increasing pressure to save money and cut costs to avoid wider deficits.

So the HSR’s two-year deferment helps a lot. It may be like kicking the can down the street, but hopefully, the situation will improve by the end of the two years to allow the can to be picked up, especially if during the period, ways are found to cut the overall cost of the project.

Other projects too have to be scrutinised. Besides the East Coast Rail Link and Trans Sabah gas pipeline projects, there are many other projects whose costs have to be examined, and whose implementation can be postponed or cancelled.

Besides the scourge of overpricing and kickbacks, there is the over-riding concern that a financial crisis has to be averted.

Indonesia’s Energy Minister last week announced that energy projects worth US$25bil (RM103.64bil) and representing half of President Joko Widodo’s grand electricity programme, would be postponed or restructured. This is to save US$8bil (RM33.1bil) to US$10bil (rm41.45bil) on imports for the projects.

Indonesia is also raising tariffs to 10% on over 1,000 goods in a move to reduce the import bill.

These are some measures the country is forced to take as its economy enters full crisis mode. It could even face a meltdown of the 1998-99 scale. The rupiah fell to almost 15,000 per US dollar, the lowest point since the 1998 crisis.

Indonesia is vulnerable to a financial crisis due to its dual deficits (in the current account and government budget), large external debt and high foreign ownership of equity and government bonds.

Indonesia is caught in a vicious cycle, which is typical when financially liberalised countries follow orthodox fire-fighting policies. When the markets perceive that the external reserves could be insufficient to pay for imports, service debts and absorb potential capital outflows, the currency depreciates.

The perception sparks a self-fulfilling prophecy. The fall in currency makes it more difficult for the government and companies to service foreign loans, and also prompts investors to pull out their money.

In such a situation, the government raises the interest rate to incentivise investors to retain their money in the country. Indonesian interest rates have risen by 1.25 percentage points since May.

However, the side effect is that homebuyers and companies find it more difficult to service their mortgage and business loans. Credit slows down, and so does the economy. This in turn causes the currency to drop further, prompting more rounds of interest rate increases, which lead to loan defaults and bankruptcies.

The economy goes into recession, leading to more capital outflows, including by local people. The currency drops again, recession deepens, and the cycle continues.

Indonesia is still at the start of this cycle. Hopefully it will find the policy tools, including unorthodox ones that work, to avoid a long stay in the spiral. But Indonesia is by no means alone. Argentina and Turkey are deep in their crises, and more and more countries are suffering the contagion effect, including South Africa, India, Iran and the Philippines.

Following the 2008-09 global financial crisis that especially hit the United States and Europe, many hundreds of billions of dollars rushed to emerging markets, including Malaysia, in search of higher yields. The liquidity was created by quantitative easing (government pumping money into the banking system) and low interest rates in the US and Europe.

Now the funds are leaving the emerging economies and returning to the US. This is due to the US policy reversing to quantitative tightening, the rise in its interest rates, and fears of an emerging market crisis and a worsening trade war.

Developing countries vulnerable to currency decline, a pull-out of funds and a crisis are those with significant current account deficits, government budget deficits and debts; low foreign reserves; large external debt; and high foreign ownership of local bonds and equities.

Malaysia is so far safe but it is wise not to be complacent. It is not easy to escape contagion once it spreads.

A few warning signs have appeared, such as a narrowing of the current account surplus and significant portfolio investment outflows (both in the second quarter), and a weakening of the ringgit, besides the larger than previously reported government debt and the need to prevent the budget deficit from increasing.

The old Scout motto, “Be Prepared”, comes in handy at times like this. It is good to prepare now for any eventuality, so as to avoid being caught by surprise.

Credit: Martin Khor Global Trends The Staronline

Related:

Seven EM countries at risk of exchange-rate crisis, Nomura says

Fall in rupiah fails to dent regional markets - Business News

 

Can China market rebound boost emerging markets sentiments?

 

 

 

 Soaring debt among Korea's self-employed puts economy at risk

 

 

  Singapore court allows return of RM46mil 1MDB, SRC International funds to Malaysia

Related posts:

The Asian financial crisis - 20 years later 

 

Trump-Washington disorder drags world down, lost humanity's fight for survival against climate change

Era of financial vulnerability

 The stock market crash in China and around the world shows how developing countries like Malaysia are increasingly vulnerable to financial shocks, including outflows of foreign funds


THE year 2016 started with a big bang, but the kind we would rather avoid. The Chinese stock market plunged for several days, causing panic around the world, with the markets also falling in many countries, East and West.

This is another wake-up call to alert us that finance has become inter-connected, indeed much too inter-connected, globally.

Many developing countries like Malaysia have been drawn into the web of the global financial system in manifold ways, and that has made them more vulnerable to adverse developments and shocks.

We are now in an era of financial vulnerability, which easily turns into vulnerability in the real economy of GDP growth, trade and jobs.

An immediate issue is whether the rout in China’s stock market will affect its real economy, in which case there will be serious effects.

One view is that it would contribute to a “hard landing” as the Chinese economy already has many problems.

Another view, more realistic in my view, is that the spillover to the real economy will not be significant. A paper by Brookings-Tsing­hua Centre shows that the inter-connection between the stock market and the economy is limited in China.

In the United States, half the population own stocks and corporations rely heavily on funds raised in the stock market, but in China less than 7% of urban Chinese invest in the stock market and corporations rely much less than American companies on the stock market to raise funds.

Nevertheless, China’s economy is expected to slow down this year. Other factors also add to a pessimistic outlook for developing countries.

These include continuing weak conditions in Europe and Japan, that may offset the US’ more steady recovery; the expected interest rate rises in the US, which will draw portfolio funds out from developing countries; and weakening of commodity prices.

Already many developing countries are suffering on the trade front. In Malaysia, exports in November 2015 grew only 6.3% from a year earlier. More worrisome, Malaysia’s industrial production, also in November, grew by only 1.8% from a year earlier.

Other Asian countries fared worse. Korea’s exports for the whole of 2015 fell 8%. Taiwan’s exports are also expected to have fallen 10% last year and Singapore’s manufacturing sector declined 6% in the most recent quarter.

China’s exports in December fell 1.4% from a year earlier but imports fell more, by 7.6%, which is bad news for other countries as China has less demand for their exports.

But of equal if not more concern is how, in the financial area, emerging economies like Malaysia have in new ways become more dependent and vulnerable in recent years.

Foreign presence in these countries’ domestic credit, bond, equity and property markets has reached unprecedented high levels, and thus new channels have emerged for the transmission of financial shocks from global boom-bust cycles, according to a South Centre paper by its chief economist Yilmaz Akyuz. (http://www.southcentre.int/research-paper-60-january-2015/)

During a boom, there is a rush by yield-seeing investors to place their global funds in emerging economies. But when perceptions or conditions change, the same funds can exit quickly, often leaving acute problems and crises in their wake.

Malaysia is among the vulnerable countries. Firstly, the fall in the prices of oil (on Jan 12 reaching below US$30 a barrel) and other commodities has affected export earnings.

The balance-of payments current account used to enjoy a huge surplus, but this has been shrinking.

In 2010–13 there were very high inflows of foreign funds into Malay­sia, averaging over 10% of GDP. But by 2015 there was a sharp reversal, with foreign funds flowing out from the equity and bond markets.

Malaysia is vulnerable to large outflows as foreigners in recent years have built up a strong presence in the domestic bond and equity markets. Foreign holdings of bonds (public and private) peaked at RM257bil in July 2014. And the share of foreign holdings in the stock market was 23.5% at the end of 2014, indicating a foreign-holding value then of around RM400bil.

Many billions of ringgit of foreign-owned bond and equity funds have been leaving the country in the past couple of years, especially 2015.

Due partly to this, Malaysia’s foreign reserves have fallen from US$130 bil in September 2014 to US$95.3bil at end-December 2015.

Although the present reserves are adequate to cover imports and short-term external debt, they are also vulnerable to further outflows of foreign-owned funds in equity and bonds.

Debt held by Malaysians is also high compared to other countries, according to another paper by Akyuz. Debt by households was estimated at 86% of GDP in first quarter 2015 by Merrill Lynch. Public debt is near to 55% of GDP (compared to an average 40% for developing countries covered in a McKinsey report). And corporate debt is estimated to be about 90–96% of GDP.

The overall local debt is thus very high, probably exceeding 200% of GDP, one of the highest ratios among developing countries. Thus, the country has financial vulnerabilities at both the external and domestic fronts.

What the country faces is part of a trend among emerging economies that is likely to last for some time. Many other countries are in far worse shape than Malaysia.

In an article last week, Martin Wolf of the Financial Times highlighted the important shift in perception by investors of the prospects for emerging economies, that has resulted in capital flowing out.

Global investors withdrew US$52bil from emerging market equity and bond funds in the third quarter of 2015, the largest quarterly outflow on record. The most important reason for this is the realisation of the deteriorating performance of the emerging economies, according to Wolf.

Thus, developing countries are in for a tough time this year. Of course the vulnerabilities may not translate into actual adverse effects, if global or local conditions improve. But it is better to prepare for the probable difficulties ahead.

By Martin Khor Global Trends

Martin Khor (director@southcen tre.org) is executive director of the South Centre. The views expressed here are entirely his own.

To fellow US interest rate hike or to cut rates?

Emerging economies in a dilemma on whether to follow suit or cut rates

“Specifically, we expect rate cuts in India, Indonesia, South Korea, Taiwan and Thailand in 2016. We also project a further 75bps of rate cuts and a 200bps reduction in RRR in China'. - Credit Suisse

THE big question is what happens next?

The much anticipated hike in US interest rates on Thursday meant that for the first time in almost a decade, US interest rates are on the way up. The 25 basis point (bps) rise in US interest rates by The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) to between 0.25% and 0.5% was made as the US economy showed tangible signs of improvement.

Such gains in the US economy through lower unemployment and higher forecast inflation has meant that the target for interest rates by the end of 2016 has been pegged at 1.5%, meaning that rates are expected to rise by 25 basis points every quarter until the end of next year.

The implications of what the US FOMC does reverberates throughout the world. Conventional thinking of the past is that higher rates in the US does put pressure on central banks elsewhere to follow suit.

But times have changed. Countries today have their own domestic economies and issues to manage and that has taken precedence over what the US does with its monetary policy.

It is clear that the de-coupling has taken place a long time ago. The European Union and Japan are still engaged in quantitative easing and are keeping rates near zero or in the case of the EU, in negative territory.

For Malaysia, the thinking is that with the difference between domestic and US interest rates still having a nice cushion, the focus of Bank Negara will be on the Malaysian economy.

Rate pressure: Should the path of the US rate cycle starts to steepen, economists say it will put pressure on Bank Negara as the ringgit may be pressured by inaction. – Reuters Countries such as China cut its interest rates in October to 4.35% as it grapples with a slowing economy. Different priorities call for different action.

But analysts feel the move by the US does create a bit of a dilemma for policy makers. Raising rates does cool an economy, which is already shifting to a lower gear given the tangible cooling of major economic indicators.

Trimming interest rates further, while will help the economy, will put more pressure on the flow of capital. Analysts feel that might not be what the central bank will want to do at the moment considering the weakness of the ringgit not only against the US dollar this year but also against the currencies of its major trading partners.

“Our rate is accommodative for economic growth and Bank Negara can raise rates when the economy is slowing down,” says an economist with a local brokerage.

To each its own

The United States has been the traditional locomotive of growth for the world for much of recent history. But the emergence of China has changed that equation. Trade of the emerging world increases with China as the second largest economy of the world grows, its influence on Malaysia and the rest of Asia has become more affixed.

It is for that reason that some are speculating that emerging economies, such as Malaysia, will keep its eyes focused on what the People’s Bank of China does while having the US action in its periphery vision.

“We argue that Asian central banks’ monetary policy stance next year will be more influenced by economic and monetary policy cycles in China than in the past, and will diverge from the US. Unlike the previous US Fed hiking cycle when virtually all Asian central banks tightened their policies, we think this time Asian policy rates will stay lower for longer,” says Credit Suisse in a report.

“Specifically, we expect rate cuts in India, Indonesia, South Korea, Taiwan and Thailand in 2016. We also project a further 75bps of rate cuts and a 200bps reduction in RRR in China.

“Given the challenging environment for exports, we expect growth in trade-dependent economies including Hong Kong, Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand to surprise the consensus on the downside. Meanwhile, more domestic-oriented economies with policy catalysts, including Indonesia and the Philippines, could outperform expectations considerably,” it says.

For Malaysia, the FOMC decision was keenly watched. Any time US interest rates move, Bank Negara pays close attention to it.

Is it the key determinant for the direction of domestic interest rates?

No, say economists. “Local conditions override what the US does,” says an economist.

For Malaysia, economists believe that the current overnight policy rate of 3.25% is appropriate to support growth. But they do too acknowledge that Malaysia is in a dicey situation depending on what happens next.

The general view is that the US will continue to push rates upwards. Just how rapidly will be important and as US rates goes up, the differential with Malaysia will narrow.

“If the local economy does as it is predicted, then there is a possibility of a small hike next year but there is no urgency to do that,” says an economist.

The question is what happens after next year should the path of the US rate cycle starts to steepen?

Economists say that will put pressure on Bank Negara as the ringgit might be pressured by inaction. As it is, the drop in crude oil prices is the most pressing issue affecting the value of the ringgit.

The effect on emerging currencies

Emerging markets have had a series of bad press over the past year. With sentiment souring and the outlook in the US getting brighter, it was no coincidence that the US dollar surged, gaining about 40% on average against emerging market currencies since May 2013.

But is it time for things to change?

Schroders thinks that might happen.

“It is difficult to argue that the Fed has been the sole factor in emerging market debt weakness. China hard landing fears, plummeting commodity prices, Brazilian political disarray, Russian policy concerns and general weakening of growth across all regions created a near perfect-storm for emerging market debt investors.

“However, a more predictable and less fraught path going forward for the Fed should help steady investor nerves and risk appetite. If developed market bond yields remain very low – as seems likely with a very slow hiking path, set out with some confidence – emerging market dollar yields may remain one of the few places to look for meaningful income generation for years to come,” it says.

Schroders says the move by the US Federal Reserve comes at a time when emerging market dollar debt seems particularly attractive.

“Yields in the primary sovereign dollar index are at highs not seen since 2010, when Treasury yields were much higher than today. Yield spreads over Treasuries for investment grade sovereign debt are just under 300 basis points, and remain at elevated levels that were last seen consistently during the European crisis of 2011. High yield sovereign debt currently has a yield to maturity of 8.5%.

“The divergence between developed market monetary policies has driven the dollar nearly 20% higher on a trade-weighted basis since July 2014. Emerging market currencies have fallen in lock step.

“With the European Central Bank now charting a path towards a steady dose of quantitative easing as growth in Europe stabilises, Fed predictability should help curb that dollar appreciation. Emerging market currencies should then likely steady at attractive levels, boosting sentiment towards the asset class. Even a modest virtuous cycle led by these factors could make emerging markets one of the strongest global fixed income performers next year, given today’s generous yield levels.”

By Jagdev Singh Sidhu The Star/Asia News Network

Related post:

The global impact of the US interest rate rise

Fear factor: Traders working in the S&P options pit at the Chicago Board of Options Exchange in Chicago, illinois. The prospect of th...

Emerging economies in turmoil

The G20 Summit last week discussed a new phenomenon – economic turmoil beginning in some major developing countries – even as coordination to prevent future crises is still elusive.



WHAT a difference half a year makes. At the G20 Summit last week, attention turned to the weakening of the emerging economies.

This was a contrast to previous summits. Then, the major developing countries were seen as the drivers of global growth, as the developed countries’ economies were faltering.

For two years or so, the European crisis was the focus of anxiety. The American economy was also plagued with domestic problems. The economies of the developing world, including China, India, Brazil and Indonesia and other Asean countries, were the safety net keeping the global economy afloat.

But in its report for the G20 summit in St Petersburg, the IMF had to do an embarrassing about-turn. It reversed its previous theory that the emerging economies were on the fast-track and keeping the global growth going.

It now warned that the stagnation in these countries is now a drag on the global economy.

Developing countries’ leaders correctly point out that their economies have been victims to the developed countries’ monetary policies, especially the United States’ “quantitative easing” (QE), under which the Federal Reserve has been pumping US$85bil (RM283bil) a month into its banking system.

A lot of this ended up in developing countries’ equity and bond markets, as US investors searched for higher yields there, since the US interest rates have been kept near zero.

However, when the Fed chairman indicated the QE would be “tapering off” and long-term interest rates started rising in response, the capital invested in developing countries has been flowing back to the US.

Vulnerable emerging economies have been hard hit, and worse may yet come. Especially vulnerable are those which have a current account deficit, since they depend on capital inflows to fund these deficits.

The outflow of needed capital and the increased risk have caused their currencies and their stock markets to plunge. This in turn leads to more capital outflow, due to anticipation of further falls in equity prices and in the domestic currency itself. The currency depreciation also fuels inflation.

Thus, former stalwarts India, Indonesia, Brazil, South Africa, Turkey are now the victims of a vicious circle.

In Indonesia, the currency fell last week across the 11,000 rupiah to the dollar mark (it was 9,500 a year ago), as the July monthly trade deficit rose to US$2.3bil (RM7.6bil) and the annual inflation rate hit 8.8% in August.

In India, the currency fell to 68 rupee to the dollar (from 56 a year ago) before recovering to 65 rupee after a well-received inaugural media conference by the new Central Bank Governor last Thursday.

India’s current account balance is running at around US$90bil a year, making it very dependent on capital inflows.

In mid-August, the government introduced limited capital control measures including restricting citizens’ money outflows to US$75,000 a person (from US$200,000 previously) and restraining local companies’ investments abroad.

The current account deficits are also significant in South Africa (US$25 billion in latest 12 months), Brazil (US$78 billion) and Turkey (US$54 billion), making them vulnerable to the vagaries of capital flows.

The South African rand has fallen in value by 18%. President Jacob Zuma blamed the currency slide on the potential tapering of the US quantitative easing.

“Decisions taken countries based solely on their own national interest can have serious implications for other countries,” he justifiably complained.

Malaysia’s currency value has also dropped recently, but the country is not as vulnerable as it has been running a current account surplus (US$14.2bil in the 12 months to June). However, the trade surplus has not been as strong recently and there is always a danger of “contagion effect”, which we know is often not based on rationality.

Countries affected have a few policy tools to deal with the situation. One is to try to stabilise the currency through the Central Bank purchasing the local currency by selling the US dollar.

But this is expensive, and the country may draw down its reserves, especially if speculators keep betting that its currency will fall by more. This is the bitter lesson that Thailand and others learnt in the 1997 financial crisis.

Another policy measure is capital controls. Ideally this should be imposed to prevent inflows.

But most countries allow the inflows in the good times, and then when these suddenly turn into outflows, the boom-bust problem if laid bare.

Malaysia in 1998-99 imposed controls on outflows of both residents and foreigners, which was effective in stopping the crisis. It was heavily criticised at that time, but now even the International Monetary Fund is recommending capital controls if the situation is bad enough.

Ultimately there has to be international reforms to prevent excessive capital flows from the source countries, and developed countries have to be disciplined so that their economic policies do not have negative fallout effects on developing countries.

But we will have to wait for such useful international coordination on capital flows and economic policies to take place.

Contributed by Global Trends, Martin Khor

> The views expressed are entirely the writer’s own.

Related posts:
 An eventful week on the TPPA
India’s financial crisis a drag on region 
Time for crucial fiscal reforms: Malaysia Budget 2014 
Currency spikes in London provide rigging Clues!