08:44 Last Hope | |
Ukraine may soon get another portion of the multi-billion loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). For Kiev, now there is no other way to avoid a default, because the hryvnia is almost in freefall, and other lenders willing to contribute comparable amounts on the horizon, no. "To Lenta.ru" decided to recall the other most well-known cases where the IMF undertook to rescue the national economy, and what it led to.The International Monetary Fund was conceived during the creation of the UN as a structure designed to prevent the global economic upheaval. Too good then remembered the Great Depression. In the early 1930s, the state could never borrow money to support the economy. They had to endure a collapse of the economy and deflation, or print money. A foreign loans and does not have the opportunity to return. The crisis has led to numerous defaults that produced a domino effect in almost all developed countries. The IMF mission was to quickly plug the financial hole in a particular country and not allow the crisis to spread to the whole world. The Fund owns capital sufficient for the simultaneous lending of several major economies that can not borrow on the open market. But help comes at a price. Typically, the IMF puts stringent conditions associated with saving mode. Typically, this means an increase in the tax burden, lower costs and budget of every social sphere, as well as the deregulation of the financial sector. Such measures do not always benefit in the long run. It happens that the IMF loans and did not pull the economy out of the crisis, and he returned a few years later. The IMF has long been criticized not only by developing countries, its main recipients, but also many well-known Western economists. The toughest opponent of the modern practice of fund - Jeffrey Sachs, who advised at the time of the Russian government's reform of the 1990s (and ruthlessly scolded Yeltsin, Chubais and our other leaders for something that does not listen to his advice). According to Sachs, the heavy Asian economic crisis of the late 1990s has worsened due to the intervention fund. Most often heard claim that the IMF is very little idea about the economy countries that fund disburses loans. This can be explained by an enormous margin of council fund representatives in North America and Europe. Meanwhile, if in the middle of the last century, this state of affairs was quite justified, because the West is completely dominated the world economy, in our time, it looks strange. State BRICS together in terms of economy are not inferior to the United States (about 50 per cent of world GDP in 1945) and the European Union. Reform Fund, launched in the 2000s, stuck in the US Congress that refuses to increase the quota of developing countries. One way or another, but low, according to critics, the competence of specialists fund leads to stabilization programs that are in the best case on the principle of "one treat, another cripple." Austerity programs lead to the impoverishment of the population, the concentration of wealth in the hands of a small group of people and often - to a decrease in tax revenues. Often state some time after recovery from the first crisis faced with a new one. The IMF has assisted various countries (especially developing) all the years of its existence. The most active group launched since the beginning of the 1990s, when no major crisis has not remained outside the purview of the fund. MexicoThe first large-scale economic crisis of the new era after the collapse of the Soviet Union, there was in Mexico in late 1994. Several years Mexicans are actively engaged in the foreign market funds to invest in the national economy. Entry into the North American Free Trade Area has strengthened the confidence of the Mexican elite that the country is going in the right direction. However, in 1994 the country broke out anti-government uprising in Chiapas. Political instability has led to capital flight from the country and the collapse of the local peso. The government and the Central Bank of Mexico decided to defend the national currency (rigidly pegged to the dollar) issue dollar bonds. For a while it helped, but then the trade balance went into minus and an exodus of investors from the market accelerated. In December of the same year, the peso was devalued for the first time, only 13 percent. But it was enough that the economy was on the brink of collapse. In January, a period of settlements on occupied earlier funds in foreign currency, and there was nothing to pay. Ernesto Zedillo government had to urgently look for a lender that would help the country to refinance and avoid default. And those made by the IMF, to unite in a consortium with the US, Canada and Latin American international organizations. Together, they have allocated for the salvation of Mexico $ 50 billion, of which the share of the fund had about $ 17 billion. The Result. Mexico to avoid a default, but the peso was devalued further. As a result, the national currency has lost over the year about 50 percent of the cost. In 1995, GDP fell by 6.2 percent. Inflation exceeded 52 percent. In two years, the proportion of poor in the population has risen from 21 percent to 37 percent. Recover from the crisis, the country was only in the 2000s, but then it suffered a new attack - the decline of oil production, plays a key role in Mexican exports. RussiaThe crisis in the new Russian economy lasted all of 90. Since 1992, the IMF launched a program of assistance, which was provided by the state currency, as other sources due to low oil prices and weak export controls actually was not. Total from 1992 to 1999, Russia received from the fund $ 22 billion. Most of these funds, however, the real economy has not had help. Moreover, one of the largest trenches, came to the country on the eve of the 1998 default, was, according to some, is stolen. The Result. IMF aid is not particularly contributed to raising the Russian economy. Loans will not prevent a collapse in GDP in the early decades, no default. Only in 1999, the country began to slowly rebound. Since then, the fund of the country is not credited. By the mid-2000s, Russia has paid in full with the IMF, and the question of new aid did not raise any global shocks during 2008, not now. It is difficult to say that played a key role in the unsuccessful experience of cooperation between Moscow and the fund. On the one hand, the volume of loans was simply insufficient for such a large economy in transition. However, funds are spent effectively, and sometimes even stolen. Distinct recommendations for overcoming the economic peak of the IMF also offered. South KoreaIn the late 1990s in East Asia, has experienced very rapid growth in the decade, large-scale crisis erupted. Thailand came under attack (from a wave went on the region), Indonesia, Singapore - in a word, almost all of the "Asian Tigers", which in the global financial environment, then was taken to admire. All had harder South Korea, is considered a model developing economies. By 1997, the country got into a debt trap. Debt of major companies under the patronage of the state (chёboley) reached an average of 600 per cent of their capital. In this situation, the bankruptcy was inevitable, and they followed. In January 1997, went bankrupt metallurgists of Hanbo Steel. It sounded a wake-up call, the country has begun an outflow of capital, and speculators began to attack the Korean Vaughn. It was believed that foreign exchange reserves ($ 25 billion) will be enough to protect the country from the onslaught, but this view was mistaken. Largely because two-thirds of these reserves were in fact distributed as loans or tied to short-term external borrowing. In late 1997, the financial situation became desperate. Seoul was forced to seek an international loan of $ 57 billion to stabilize the situation. Request approved. A group of creditors (IMF, World Bank, USA, Japan and several other countries) to provide the required amount to the traditional terms of "austerity." The collapse of the won was gradually suspended. Nevertheless, the economy at the end of 1998 fell by 5.7 percent. The Result. South Korea out of the crisis very quickly. In 1999, the economy once again showed strong growth, almost completely overcome the collapse of the previous year. By the end of 2001, the debts were repaid to the IMF. However, some long-term effects of the crisis affecting the present day. In particular, the ultra-low unemployment rate of 2 per cent to recover and failed. During the crisis, was closed 55 large enterprises, poverty and stratification of the population increased significantly. GreeceGreece was never able to recover from the global financial crisis of 2008, and public debt continued to accumulate rapidly, passed for 100 percent of GDP. By May 2010, the country was unable to pay off foreign debts, and the yield on its bonds jumped to prohibitive levels. "Troika" consisting of the IMF, the ECB and the European Commission has allocated a loan of $ 110 billion to keep the country afloat. The following year, the eurozone countries had to allocate an additional 130 billion dollars. Requirements for savings in the allocation of loans were most severe, leading to the collapse of income, a threefold increase in unemployment and the collapse of social services. The Result. Five years later, Greece is still in deep crisis. Although this year is expected to demonstrate the economic growth the country after six years of depression, none of the problems of the Greek economy is not actually resolved. In February, the Greeks failed to agree on an extension of the current program of assistance for several months. What happens next is unclear, but it is obvious that all the debts will not be able to pay Athens at all desire. There is a good chance that the IMF loan will be the first, and that will not be refunded. UkraineKiev turned to the IMF for help during the 2008 crisis. The collapse of the hryvnia and the fall in GDP had already been impressive, as indeed in most countries of the former USSR. Kiev Foundation provided a credit line of 16.5 billion dollars, but the last tranche has not been received. In 2013, Ukraine has completely repaid the loan, but a few months later events occurred, the hryvnia fell down, foreign exchange reserves melted. IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde has no objection to the new loan in the amount of $ 17 billion. The problem in the details of the agreement. Fund requires the most severe fiscal and tariff policy. Partially Ukraine has fulfilled the conditions of the IMF, raising, including tariffs for gas is almost four times. Nevertheless, the outcome of negotiations is still unclear. In addition, the allocated funds may not be enough to save the country from default, because, according to some estimates, the need of Kiev in the financing significantly exceeds 17 billion. Given the fact that the problems of Ukraine, in contrast to the same South Korea, definitely are long-term, to predict the results of cooperation with the state fund is problematic. But a significant reduction in social standards in the country is guaranteed, since the requirements for saving IMF set to the maximum possible. However, given the situation in Ukraine, it is inevitable in any case, regardless of whether Kiev will take a new loan or declare a default. Dmitry Migunov | |
|
| |
| Total comments: 0 | |