Germany won’t spare Greek pain – it has an interest in breaking us
Debt restructuring has always been our aim in negotiations – but for some
eurozone leaders Grexit is the goal
Yanis Varoufakis, former Greek finance minister
Friday 10 July 2015 14.25 EDT
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/10/germany-greek-pain-debt-relief-grexit

Greece’s financial drama has dominated the headlines for five years for one
reason: the stubborn refusal of our creditors to offer essential debt
relief. Why, against common sense, against the IMF’s verdict and against
the everyday practices of bankers facing stressed debtors, do they resist a
debt restructure? The answer cannot be found in economics because it
resides deep in Europe’s labyrinthine politics.

In 2010, the Greek state became insolvent. Two options consistent with
continuing membership of the eurozone presented themselves: the sensible
one, that any decent banker would recommend – restructuring the debt and
reforming the economy; and the toxic option – extending new loans to a
bankrupt entity while pretending that it remains solvent.

Official Europe chose the second option, putting the bailing out of French
and German banks exposed to Greek public debt above Greece’s socioeconomic
viability. A debt restructure would have implied losses for the bankers on
their Greek debt holdings.Keen to avoid confessing to parliaments that
taxpayers would have to pay again for the banks by means of unsustainable
new loans, EU officials presented the Greek state’s insolvency as a problem
of illiquidity, and justified the “bailout” as a case of “solidarity” with
the Greeks.

To frame the cynical transfer of irretrievable private losses on to the
shoulders of taxpayers as an exercise in “tough love”, record austerity was
imposed on Greece, whose national income, in turn – from which new and old
debts had to be repaid – diminished by more than a quarter. It takes the
mathematical expertise of a smart eight-year-old to know that this process
could not end well.

Once the sordid operation was complete, Europe had automatically acquired
another reason for refusing to discuss debt restructuring: it would now hit
the pockets of European citizens! And so increasing doses of austerity were
administered while the debt grew larger, forcing creditors to extend more
loans in exchange for even more austerity.

Our government was elected on a mandate to end this doom loop; to demand
debt restructuring and an end to crippling austerity. Negotiations have
reached their much publicised impasse for a simple reason: our creditors
continue to rule out any tangible debt restructuring while insisting that
our unpayable debt be repaid “parametrically” by the weakest of Greeks,
their children and their grandchildren.

In my first week as minister for finance I was visited by Jeroen
Dijsselbloem, president of the Eurogroup (the eurozone finance ministers),
who put a stark choice to me: accept the bailout’s “logic” and drop any
demands for debt restructuring or your loan agreement will “crash” – the
unsaid repercussion being that Greece’s banks would be boarded up.

Five months of negotiations ensued under conditions of monetary
asphyxiation and an induced bank-run supervised and administered by the
European Central Bank. The writing was on the wall: unless we capitulated,
we would soon be facing capital controls, quasi-functioning cash machines,
a prolonged bank holiday and, ultimately, Grexit.

The threat of Grexit has had a brief rollercoaster of a history. In 2010 it
put the fear of God in financiers’ hearts and minds as their banks were
replete with Greek debt. Even in 2012, when Germany’s finance minister,
Wolfgang Schäuble, decided that Grexit’s costs were a worthwhile
“investment” as a way of disciplining France et al, the prospect continued
to scare the living daylights out of almost everyone else.

By the time Syriza won power last January, and as if to confirm our claim
that the “bailouts” had nothing to do with rescuing Greece (and everything
to do with ringfencing northern Europe), a large majority within the
Eurogroup – under the tutelage of Schäuble – had adopted Grexit either as
their preferred outcome or weapon of choice against our government.

Greeks, rightly, shiver at the thought of amputation from monetary union.
Exiting a common currency is nothing like severing a peg, as Britain did in
1992, when Norman Lamont famously sang in the shower the morning sterling
quit the European exchange rate mechanism (ERM). Alas, Greece does not have
a currency whose peg with the euro can be cut. It has the euro – a foreign
currency fully administered by a creditor inimical to restructuring our
nation’s unsustainable debt.

To exit, we would have to create a new currency from scratch. In occupied
Iraq, the introduction of new paper money took almost a year, 20 or so
Boeing 747s, the mobilisation of the US military’s might, three printing
firms and hundreds of trucks. In the absence of such support, Grexit would
be the equivalent of announcing a large devaluation more than 18 months in
advance: a recipe for liquidating all Greek capital stock and transferring
it abroad by any means available.

With Grexit reinforcing the ECB-induced bank run, our attempts to put debt
restructuring back on the negotiating table fell on deaf ears. Time and
again we were told that this was a matter for an unspecified future that
would follow the “programme’s successful completion” – a stupendous
Catch-22 since the “programme” could never succeed without a debt
restructure.

This weekend brings the climax of the talks as Euclid Tsakalotos, my
successor, strives, again, to put the horse before the cart – to convince a
hostile Eurogroup that debt restructuring is a prerequisite of success for
reforming Greece, not an ex-post reward for it. Why is this so hard to get
across? I see three reasons.

One is that institutional inertia is hard to beat. A second, that
unsustainable debt gives creditors immense power over debtors – and power,
as we know, corrupts even the finest. But it is the third which seems to me
more pertinent and, indeed, more interesting.

The euro is a hybrid of a fixed exchange-rate regime, like the 1980s ERM,
or the 1930s gold standard, and a state currency. The former relies on the
fear of expulsion to hold together, while state money involves mechanisms
for recycling surpluses between member states (for instance, a federal
budget, common bonds). The eurozone falls between these stools – it is more
than an exchange-rate regime and less than a state.

And there’s the rub. After the crisis of 2008/9, Europe didn’t know how to
respond. Should it prepare the ground for at least one expulsion (that is,
Grexit) to strengthen discipline? Or move to a federation? So far it has
done neither, its existentialist angst forever rising. Schäuble is
convinced that as things stand, he needs a Grexit to clear the air, one way
or another. Suddenly, a permanently unsustainable Greek public debt,
without which the risk of Grexit would fade, has acquired a new usefulness
for Schauble.

What do I mean by that? Based on months of negotiation, my conviction is
that the German finance minister wants Greece to be pushed out of the
single currency to put the fear of God into the French and have them accept
his model of a disciplinarian eurozone.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to