Wednesday, October 06, 2010  
D. Strauss-Kahn  Germany  Opposed To Unconditional IMF Safety Nets ... Germany is  opposed to the  setting up of 'global financial safety nets' under the  aegis of the  International Monetary Fund, a Deutsche Bundesbank official  said  Tuesday. The official told journalists that the mechanisms  proposed by  the G-20 group of nations, would create moral hazard by  obliging  countries to provide unlimited liquidity without conditions in  times of  financial stress. The comments come as the German delegation  prepares  to fly to Washington DC for the autumn meetings of the IMF and  World  Bank ... The IMF's willingness to provide loans under the PCL to   countries which, in its own words, "may not meet the FCL's high   qualification limits" appears to have raised hackles at the Bundesbank,   which has consistently opposed any dilution of the IMF's principles of   only lending against strict commitments to sustainable fiscal and   monetary policy. The initiative to expand such "safety nets" is part of   the G-20's efforts to make the international financial system more   stable. It has been promoted by South Korea and has received some   limited support from France and U.K. – WSJournal.com  
Dominant Social Theme: The world needs a central bank and the IMF is ready to be one. 
Free-Market Analysis: As we have written plenty of  times before,  it's startling to see how fast the Anglo-American power  elite is  willing to move now toward a more specific and comprehensive  global  governance. When we read this article, even just the beginning,  it was  obvious to us what was going on. And then we came to this  sentence: "It  means a de facto obligation to provide unlimited liquidity  in  euros...but the IMF is not a central bank for the world." Exactly.  Is  there a sub dominant social theme in the article. Perhaps so:  "Pushback  will continue but the IMF's expanded role is inevitable. 
Indeed, the IMF is being cast in some places as an inevitable  precursor  to a world central bank. It need only graduate from SDRs to  bancors  and then expand its monetary authority. Of course we've covered  this  evolution in the past, but we didn't take it very seriously. The  world  moves slowly and is a complex place. But as we've seen (and  commented  on) over the past year, the Anglo-American elite seems to have  shed any  inhibitions about moving slowly or deliberately toward global   governance goals. 
It is in a race of some sort, though who or what it is running from  or  towards is not clear. But in picking up the pace in a kind of mad  dash  toward some unseen finish line, it is abandoning at least a century  of  deliberate, promotional construction designed to bring Western  citizens  in line with its goals. We've written we have no explanation.  Let's  say for argument's sake there are 6,000 in the ranks of the Anglo   American familial elite. That still leaves six billion people that one   needs to "bring along" presumably. But convincing people seems about the   last thing on the mind of elite these days so far as we can tell. In   aggregate, it gallops madly forward, careening out of control, oblivious   to obstacles, increasingly leaving a trail of ruin behind. 
The bluntest and most alarming presentation we've read recently   regarding the IMF comes from Germany's powerful Spiegel magazine. This   is ironic, given that the Germans, as we can see from our initial   article excerpt above, are the lone power standing up to the IMF's   efforts to remake itself (with fairly blinding speed) into a global   central bank. But it is this article we will spend the rest of our time   analyzing. It deserves all of our attention – and yours, though trying   to describe this article leaves one almost without words. It is so   fulsome, so slavishly admiring, so ... craven in its intention to please   the powers-that-be that it is a truly remarkable example of a certain   kind of journalism. It is available in its entirety (translated) online   and we would urge anyone to read it. Here is how it begins: 
Three years ago, the International Monetary Fund was irrelevant,  an  object of derision for all opponents of globalization. Under director   Dominique Strauss-Kahn (above left) and as a result of the global   economic crisis, the IMF has since become more influential -- governing   like a global financial authority. It is also putting Europe under   pressure to reform. 
The building that houses the headquarters of the global economy  is a  heavily guarded, 12-story beige structure in downtown Washington  with a  large glass atrium and water bubbling in fountains. The flags of  the  187 member states are lined up in tight formation. 
Visitors walking into the office building find the cafeteria on  the  right, where many meetings are held. There, experts in their   shirtsleeves, their jackets draped over the backs of chairs, drink   lattes out of paper cups and talk countries into crises or upturns. A   little farther down the hallway is the Terrace, the IMF building's   upscale restaurant where the director receives official guests. 
On a Tuesday afternoon in late September, as the first leaves are   falling from trees outside, the director, wearing a blue suit and a   blue tie, is sitting on a blue couch high up in his office at the   headquarters of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), outlining his   idea of a new world. Some of it already exists, in the form of a new   world order established in September 2008 to replace the one that was   collapsing at the time. The result wasn't half bad -- but it is robust? 
There is nothing halfhearted in this voluminous portrait of Dominique   Strauss-Kahn and the reinvention of the IMF. In the first four   paragraphs descriptions like "global financial authority" and "new world   order" and "new world" are strewn about with all the subtlety of an  IMF  bailout itself. The very next paragraphs read as follows: 
'The Money Is The Medicine' ... These are important times for   humanity. The crisis has forced everyone to see many things from a new   perspective. Now the IMF is preparing for its annual meeting on Oct. 8.   Can it live up to expectations, and can it police the new global   economic order and keep global banks in check? "You have to imagine the   IMF as a doctor," says Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the 61-year-old director   of the International Monetary Fund. "The money is the medicine. But  the  countries -- the patients -- have to change their habits if they  want to  recover. It doesn't work any other way." He smiles benevolently  as he  says these things, his eyes disappearing behind small cushions  of  wrinkled skin. 
Money is not medicine of course. The IMF, with its history of  reducing  middle classes around the world to ruin, is nothing like a  doctor.  After reading it, if one still believes in such a thing as  freedom in  the world, one wants to take a long bath. There is a brutal   deliberateness about the language (assuming the translation is   accurate), which must be calculated. From the next paragraphs: 
The IMF, says Strauss-Kahn, warned the world about the collapse  and  about the American real estate bubble and its consequences, but   "politicians don't want to hear bad news." And when the crisis arrived   in the fall of 2008, as predicted, it took the old world -- Europe,   which always takes six months to make a decision -- too long to react.   That was the time when the world was laying the foundation for a new   order. 
The New World Order ... There are two telephones to  Strauss-Kahn's  left and two to his right. The room has high ceilings,  beige carpet and  white curtains. An old clock and books about Mexican  painting stand on  the bookshelf. The IMF's director is sometimes  referred to as DSK,  which makes Strauss-Kahn sound like a three-letter  brand like IMF or  USA, and yet he speaks English with a soft French  accent. DSK leans  back in his chair, weighing his words, glancing at the  audio recorder  and smiling. The new world order? Well, let's talk about  it, he says. 
There is no hesitancy here. If there was ever a literary coming-out   party for elite intentions to create a one-world financial structure, it   would seem to us to be this article. One hardly needs to read between   the lines. Skimming from paragraph to paragraph is like being stabbed   between the eyes. ... 
Countries like China and India are becoming important, countries   with rising markets that have long been stable and are clearly powerful.   Whenever he is in China or other parts of Asia, says Strauss-Kahn, the   leaders there tell him that they have written off Europe for now.  "They  say they want a strong Europe, but there is always one part of  the world  that is lagging behind. They say that in the past it was  them, and now  it is Europe. It's a shame, but the world can live  without Europe." 
The new world could be a frightening place. The IMF director  says:  "The Europeans still believe they are the center of the world, but  in  reality this is not clear any longer. Currently, the question is   whether Europe will remain a participant in a game with many players --   that is not necessarily a given." 
The Rise of the G-20 ... The United Nations will probably become   less important; the organization is far too slow-moving and sluggish.   And, if one understands DSK correctly on this point, the importance of   the United States -- that egomaniacal country which is incapable of   action -- will also decline. Of course, Strauss-Kahn would never speak   in such terms, but he does point out that it was the United States that   reacted to the 2008 crisis, not with a long-term view, but bank by  bank.  "They tried to solve Bear Stearns first, and then Fannie and  Freddie,  and really believed that each hurdle was the last one," he  says. 
What will become important, however, is the G-20, that coalition  of  the strongest economies, the center of power in a new world. The G-20   gave the IMF $850 billion (€620 billion) and the mission to solve the   crisis. What followed, says, Strauss-Kahn, was "the biggest global   coordination ever." 
Does this mean that the IMF became the first post-crisis world   government? ... Strauss-Kahn stretches when he hears the question, and   pauses for 20 seconds before responding. He is an elegant man, a   white-haired Parisian with three deep furrows in his brow, who smiles   slyly and flirtatiously. He is a ladies' man, not particularly tall and   even a little stooped. 
Solving Global Problems ... Sitting in his cool office, a room  that  smells of fresh flowers, he says: "No, no, the government has to   consist of elected people, and that's more like the G-20. But the   reality is the G20 – or any other grouping – doesn't operate like a   government. Their willingness to work together was very strong during   the crisis, but frankly I think it's fair to say that it's decreasing.   The more leaders and finance ministers believe that the crisis is over –   even if they are mistaken – the more they are concerned about their  own  problems and less so about coordination and consensus." 
In Strauss-Kahn's view, the IMF should become an administrative  unit  of sorts for the G-20, an agency that "tries to find solutions for   global and national problems," and comes up with plans and create   values. "In the end we aim at much more than just the right financial   and economic policies. The ultimate goal, of course, is world peace   through economic stability." This is the way Strauss-Kahn views his   organization, and the astonishing thing is that hardly anyone, with the   exception of a lone professor in Boston, disagrees with him anymore. 
All right. We'll stop. What have we learned from the beginning of  this  truly remarkable article? (We hesitate to call it an article, for  it's  more of an encomium a kind of ritualized praise-offering of the  sort  troubadours used to prepare for royalty.) 
First ... Europe is too slow and fragmented currently to compete in a   world of dashing powers like India and China. Second ... same thing   with the United Nations, according to Strauss-Kahn (and the IMF is an   arm of the UN). The United States itself, divided between its republican   past and its authoritarian future has also given offense and is   characterized as "egomaniacal." Third ... the legislative body of   choice, this article seems to indicate, is going to be the G20, and the   IMF will seek validation and credibility from it (along with funds)   before proceeding on its mission which is to become the G20s   "administrative unit." 
Reading this article, it is possible to visualize the Anglo-American   elite as straining ponderously to take flight. It is attempting to shed   in one convulsive effort, the painstaking paraphernalia with which it   has encumbered itself in the past. The days of patiently building world   government through the EU or the UN are OVER. The decision has been   made. The G20 is now the vehicle of choice and the IMF will interpret   its G20 mandate as it wishes to under the auspices of the kindly   Strauss-Kahn who wants nothing more than to build "peace through   economic stability." 
It is truly remarkable. Reading it (and it is a very long article) is   like watching a beautifully crafted knife being withdrawn from its   sheath with agonizing slowness and deliberateness. When you are   finished, the knife is revealed to you in its all its gleaming fullness.   It lies there in front of you, winking with malevolence.  A little   more: 
Sitting in his office, surrounded by the scent of flowers,   Strauss-Kahn prefers to talk about Europe's sad future. "The European   institutions," he says, "were absolutely necessary and very useful for   many reasons, but only in quiet times. ... The crisis exposed very   clearly the way the EU is working. There is, in my view, too much   concern about domestic safeguarding and domestic problems rather than   concern about the EU itself.  
The result of that is that the recovery in Europe is lagging  behind  while the recovery in Asia, South America, the US and Africa is  rather  strong. I'm afraid that if the European countries don't take the  bull  by the horns, they will be the part of the world with sluggish   recovery. After building the Union and creating the euro, the European   Union now needs to take a third step, which is more economic policy   coordination and more fiscal policy integration, and so more   centralization. But the system moves very slowly." 
He reaches toward the table, but there isn't any water there.   Everyone at the IMF drinks too little water and too much coffee. ...   Then he says: "You can't have a monetary union without a reasonably   coordinated fiscal policy. And you cannot make it work when neighbors   make deals: If you're nice to me, I'll be nice to you -- just as France   and Germany did when they exceeded the 3 percent deficit limit. Europe   needs rules, surveillance and sanctions. Sanctions should not be the   suspension of voting rights. Who cares about voting rights? They have to   be financial sanctions -- payable not during a crisis, of course, but a   few years later." 
In the end, DSK raves about China, Asia, dynamism and speed. 
We bet Strauss-Kahn raves about China. There's a country for you,  only  about half a century out from starving 50 million of its citizens   deliberately. For Strauss-Kahn of course the efficiency of   authoritarianism is far preferable to the tattered republicanism of the   "egomaniacal" United States. But the real threats in this article are   reserved for Europe, which he says over and over in various ways must   become more "integrated" and "centralized" so that the system does not   move so "slowly." 
Here's how the authors describe how the article came about:  "SPIEGEL's  journey of discovery into the world of the IMF lasted 10  weeks. It  began in Washington, and then led to Hungary, Greece, Oslo,  Brussels,  Boston, New York City and back to Washington, where the Fund  is  headquartered, on the corner of H Street and Pennsylvania Avenue. In   the beginning, the IMF didn't even bother to refuse interview requests.   The organization doesn't simply open itself up to visitors; it has been   criticized too much in the past. Then, Strauss-Kahn decided to open  the  doors, and from that point on there were no more barriers or  taboos. The  only rule was that most interviews were to be conducted off  the record,  and quotes had to be submitted for authorization." 
In normal Western journalism, as we are aware of it, no one submits   quotes for "authorization" let alone a media complex as authoritative as   Spiegel. You fact check quotes (it's done all the time) but you don't   read them back verbatim. And you certainly don't "submit them." That's   just another part of the oddity of this article from our perspective.   All we can think of is that, having decided to go through with it, the   IMF, Strauss-Kahn and his shadowy elite handlers decided to make a full   blown statement of intent. 
Conclusion: Whether the article is a kind of  emphatic trial  balloon or a full-on proclamation of where the world is  now headed –  and at breakneck speed – time will tell.  But what an  article it is!  And from our point of view a most disturbing one. 
     
            | 
Comments
Post a Comment