The Association of Southeast Asian Nations
(Asean) and the European Union (EU) have very different social and economic
characteristics. Based on GDP, the economic power of the EU is more than nine
times that of Asean.
The EU
already started its integration in 1958, long before the Bangkok Declaration of
Asean in 1967. Despite the differences, the current EU debt crisis may give
Asean valuable lessons for the future.
The
Eurozone crisis was triggered by many complex factors. Although economists
might argue over the real cause of the crisis, there are at least three
interrelated factors that Asean can take lessons from.
First
is the disparity in economic competitiveness of member countries. It creates
trade imbalances. Strong economies, such as Germany, have exports whose value
is far exceeds their imports. At the same time, weak economies such as
Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain (PIIGS) are in the opposite
condition.
PIIGS
export products have lost competitiveness in global market, forcing them to
rely more on debts to finance their trade deficits. The euro, as a single
currency, exacerbates the situation since PIIGS cannot independently devalue
the currency to make their products cheaper.
Because
of the persistence trade imbalances, weak countries accumulate debts until
reaching the point where they cannot pay anymore. Their behavior is driven by
the fact that the incentive to collect debts increases along with a decreasing
interest rate after they joined the euro.
The
second reason is lack of commitment from EU leaders. The 1992 Maastricht Treaty
explicitly says that euro members must have a maximum 3 per cent of GDP in
annual borrowing limits and 60 per cent debt-to-GDP ratio to ensure the
stability of the Eurozone and prevent reckless fiscal behavior. Years later,
everyone seems to forget they ever had such limits.
Needless
to say that Greece ignored this restriction, resulting in a budget deficit of
12 per cent of GDP and 160 per cent debt-to-GDP ratio. Some media accused
Greece of manipulating Maastricht rule by using complex derivatives and
financial engineering. What bothers us are Germany and France, two biggest
countries in the eurozone.
They
also exceeded the minimum rules by making a 4 and 7 per cent budget deficit and
83 and 82 per cent debt-to-GDP ratio, respectively. It leads us to a perception
that the EU leaders cannot maintain their own rules.
Last
week, EU member countries, except the UK and Czech Republic, signed a landmark
fiscal-compact treaty to improve previous agreements. They made the rules
stricter, including granting the right to European Court of Justice to check
whether countries implement budget rules properly and creating an automatic
mechanism to force countries to correct their budgets. It remains to be proved
whether they actually can implement the new rules consistently.
The
third reason is the loss of confidence in all euro members. This factor is a
common response to all the previous factors. Markets became anxious over
whether the euro currency can be maintained and leaders are capable of
containing the crisis. The interest-rate indicators show that euro countries
have reached the highest point since the inception of the single currency,
meaning the public does not have much faith in European economy.
Concern
of a worsening crisis has loomed large since rating agencies responded to the
crisis by reducing sovereign ratings of several weak countries to below
investment grade or “junk” — although critics say that the rating agencies
seemed to have been overreacting since they did not give a proper warning
before the crisis exploded.
Asean
is the most integrated regional organisation in the developing world. It may
not take the EU as a role model for its economic development, but undeniably,
the eurozone crisis can give an insight on how economic integration should be
handled with care.
The
main important lesson for Asean is that every economic integration should start
with efforts to reach the same economic development in each member state. It is
important to avoid the economic imbalance that happens in the eurozone. If
Asean wants to deepen its integration, it must ensure all member states grow
economically with the same pace and leave no country behind.
For
now, economic imbalance among Asean member states may have little influence on
Asean development. In Asean, trade with external partners is far more
significant than intra-Asean trade, so member states seem more vulnerable to
shock outside Asean rather than inside the region. But, in the future, this
condition will evolve as Asean will be more integrated. Sustainable growth in a
region can only be achieved if all member states are in the same stage of
development.
Learning
from the EU crisis, Asean should also create a mechanism to ensure fast and
proper response when a crisis happens. The credibility for Asean is needed so
that markets believe Asean can handle a crisis well.
Resisting
globalisation is like defying the law of gravity. Economic integration is
inevitable and trade agreements are necessary to make products competitive in
the global market. But the more integrated countries, the more vulnerable they
are to another’s internal problems. Asean, with the sense of community, should
handle its integration carefully so that it can bring more good that harm.
Rudi
Winandoko
The
Jakarta Post
The
writer is a diplomat at the Indonesian foreign ministry
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