Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 1:16 PM
Susan Strange, the godmother of international political economy, wrote a book that is suddenly very relevant to thinking about today's international monetary system. In Sterling and British Policy, Strange talked about different types of international currency. Top currencies, for example, are forms of international money where the economic incentive to hold them is pretty overwhelming. Negotiated currencies, on the other hand, are forms of international money where there the economic incentive is more muted, but political imperatives lead to an agreement on a particular form of currency as the reserve to hold.
Why am I bringing this up? Remember, like 48 hours ago, when I said that this news item warranted watching?
Well, this Financial Times story by Jamil Anderlini drops the other shoe:
China’s central bank on Monday proposed replacing the US dollar as the international reserve currency with a new global system controlled by the International Monetary Fund.
In an essay posted on the People’s Bank of China’s website, Zhou Xiaochuan, the central bank’s governor, said the goal would be to create a reserve currency “that is disconnected from individual nations and is able to remain stable in the long run, thus removing the inherent deficiencies caused by using credit-based national currencies”.
Analysts said the proposal was an indication of Beijing’s fears that actions being taken to save the domestic US economy would have a negative impact on China.
“This is a clear sign that China, as the largest holder of US dollar financial assets, is concerned about the potential inflationary risk of the US Federal Reserve printing money,” said Qu Hongbin, chief China economist for HSBC....
China has little choice but to hold the bulk of its $2,000bn of foreign exchange reserves in US dollars, and this is unlikely to change in the near future.
Here's a link to the actual paper, which is not long.
That last paragraph is important -- what China is proposing is not going to happen anytime soon. Indeed, looking at the actual proposal, I'm not convinced that Beijing's idea is even doable (a show of hands -- who's comfortable with the IMF as the world's central bank? Anyone?).
With China and Russia both proposing some sort of change in the international monetary system, we're about to some veeery interesting economic negotiations. There are other important players -- the EU, UK, Japan, Brazil, the Gulf economies, etc. And their incentives to switch away from the dollar are more cross-cutting. For example, while the EU would probably love to switch to a system that keeps the euro from appreciating too much, I suspect they will be loathe to reallocate the IMF voting quotas that China would demand in any switch to a new system. Both Japan and the Gulf economies have security considerations that make them less eager to change.
If this does happen, however, the United States will suffer a serious loss of standing and, oh yes, a much harder budget constraint. And whatever happens, it would be difficult to call the dollar a top currency anymore. I think we have clearly crossed some threshhold where the dollar is now a negotiated currency -- and some of the negotiating partners are pretty hostile to U.S. hegemony.
Developing....
EXPLORE:GLOBALIZATION, CHINA, DOLLAR, FINANCIAL MELTDOWN, GLOBAL GOVERNANCE, INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY
As I recall, we've been there. Back in the 1960s, a special form of reserve currenct called Special Drawing Rights was proposed at the IMF (I think) as a replacement for or complement to other reserve currencies. Didn't catch on, though.
Interesting, after all the foreign policy controversies of the last few years, that the hostility to "US hegemony" is motivated mostly by resentment over the apparent consequences of American domestic economic policy. Resentment and hostility may not really be the right words, despite the rhetoric that finds its way into the media; the great majority of developed countries would most likely be content with American primacy in an economic order that didn't threaten their own prosperity. The loss of confidence that we have such an economic order anymore is the story here.
It's hard to imagine this going down in an orderly fashion, and it would be a significant blow to US geo-standing. Will Obama go for it? Or will he retaliate by trying to correct the trade imbalance via something like Buffett's IC plan? And is China prepared for their exports to significantly rise in price when they're already starting to be undercut by places like Vietnam? And does this mean that China and Russia will start contributing to the IMF in line with the size of their economies (China in particular has been a laggard)? Are they comfortable putting this power in an organization in which they have around 6% voting power?
The administration will have to do some pretty fierce ignoring of this.
Daniel W. Drezner is professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.
Read More
(4)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE