THE
longer the eurozone leaders quibble over possible solutions to the debt woes of
some of their less fortunate members, the shakier is the outlook of the banking
system.
At this moment, some may still be in a denial
mode while others are caught in the game of pros and cons.
Suggestions and comments on possible solutions
abound but concrete details from the authorities have yet to surface.
JP Morgan Securities expected eurozone
governments to inject up to 150 billion euros, an initiative that would be
similar to the US TARP programme, Reuters reported.
One idea is for the potential 440 billion
euros eurozone rescue fund, EFSF, to act as an insurer, guaranteeing the first
portion of losses on Italian or Spanish debt.
However, nothing concrete had been put forward
to eurozone finance ministers, Reuters said.
Another proposal is to turn the EFSF into a
bank, which would allow it to access to European Central Bank (ECB) funds,
meaning that it would effectively have unlimited capacity.
“But the ECB has raised concerns about such a
step, which would politicise ECB operations and put it on the line for massive
liabilities,” said Reuters.
It is a good sign that at least suggestions
are turning up but these have to be carried out in a constructive manner by
people with the firepower.
There has to be someone driving the decisions.
Just raising concerns will bring the world nowhere.
There must already be plans to recapitalise banks,
if necessary. One of the best alternatives would be for an enlarged lifeline to
banks, should their exposure to the distressed eurozone countries fall into
problems possibly arising from default.
The severity of the impact on the banking
system, in case of default, bank runs or some other catastrophic event, is not
to be under-estimated.
The worst thing is when the systemic effect
and contagion ripple across the borders and markets elsewhere. The panic and
subsequent poor sentiment can snowball into a myriad of other problems.
We have seen, in the 2008 global financial
crisis, how banks and markets elsewhere were impacted by the fall of Lehman
Brothers.
In the aftermath, tremendous efforts and
debates were held, primarily in the United States, to decide on various massive
steps to revive the economy and the banking system.
There were a lot of concerns and grouses on
the ground level but leaders that showed a fair amount of decisiveness, pushed
through with the agenda that showed high priority on reviving the banking
sector.
As such, top priority should be placed in
Europe on the stability of their banking system. By now, leaders of the
eurozone, especially the more powerful ones, should have a plan on how to stem
the problems faced by their banks.
They should not wait until banks start going
under; the worst-case scenario being the domino effect.
Anything is possible in a situation of
non-action. If smaller countries like Malaysia could restructure and
recapitalise its banking system, as in the aftermath of the 1997 Asian
financial crisis, why can't a powerful bloc like the eurozone perform even
better feats?
Plain Speaking - By Yap Leng Kuen
Business & Investment Opportunities
YourVietnamExpert is a division of Saigon Business Corporation Pte Ltd, Incorporated in Singapore since 1994. As Your Business Companion, we propose a range of services in Consulting, Investment and Management, focusing three main economic sectors: International PR; Healthcare & Wellness;and Tourism & Hospitality. We also propose Higher Education, as a bridge between educational structures and industries, by supporting international programs. Sign up with twitter to get news updates with @SaigonBusinessC. Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment