Will Ireland’s bailout end the euro crisis?

The government of Ireland sought a European Union-International Monetary Fund bailout over the weekend, finally succumbing to pressure from its fellow Eurozone members and panicked financial markets. That makes Ireland the second of the Eurozone’s 16 members to require a rescue, after Greece got a $150 billion package in May. Ireland’s will likely be smaller – perhaps $110 billion over three years — though the final details are still being negotiated. Olli Rehn, the EU commissioner for monetary affairs, said the bailout of Ireland is “a critical step forward” to “safeguard financial stability in Europe.”

The Irish bailout will bring to a close weeks of rabid speculation about Ireland’s fate that plagued financial markets throughout the world. But is the Irish rescue finally the end of the chaotic instability the Eurozone has experienced for more than a year? Will investor confidence be restored over the zone’s future? Probably not, in my opinion. As has been the case throughout the euro crisis, Europe’s leaders are dealing with only one part of a bigger problem, and only when their backs are against the wall.

The Ireland crisis followed a similar pattern to the Greek crisis earlier this year. For weeks, Ireland’s ministers and their counterparts across Europe vowed that the country could go it alone and fix its own financial woes without EU aid, hoping that the Irish economy could muddle through until sentiment in financial markets improved. But as with Greece, investors didn’t believe them. In Greece’s case, the concern was the miserable state of the government’s finances; in Ireland’s, it’s the burden of a floundering banking sector brought low by a property bust. But in both cases, the numbers were just too ugly. In September, the Irish government said its bank rescue plan would push the budget deficit up to a staggering 32% of GDP this year and balloon its government debt to 99% of GDP. So, as was the case with Greece, nervous investors kept hiking up the spread between Irish government bonds and benchmark German bonds to record levels, a sign that bondholders saw Ireland’s debt as increasingly risky to hold. Finally, Ireland and the EU bowed to the inevitable – a bailout. “A small sovereign like Ireland faced with an outsized problem that we have in our banking sector, cannot on its own address all those problems,” Irish Finance Minister Brian Lenihan admitted.

Just as the Greek bailout failed to stem the euro crisis, I believe the Irish bailout will fail as well. That’s because all of the underlying issues will remain in place. Sure, this time around, the EU has funds already committed to help Ireland – the $1 trillion rescue fund announced in May, which didn’t exist during the Greek meltdown. But the availability of bailout money won’t resolve the uncertainties inherent in the very nature of the EU’s bailout scheme.

First, the success of the bailout will depend on the ability of Ireland’s government to impose incredibly severe budget cuts, demanded by its Eurozone pals in return for the rescue funds. In other words, the Irish people will have to absorb years of economic pain to protect bondholders in Germany, the UK and France. As in the situation in Greece, my guess is that investors will continue to hold doubts as to whether that formula is viable. Concerns will persist over whether Ireland can politically or economically impose such austerity measures while the economy is contracting. That may keep investors nervous, as they are with Greece, that a restructuring of debt might still be waiting in the wings, an outcome that would force a haircut on bondholders.

Second, the bailout of Ireland, as with Greece, does nothing to help the economy out of its crisis, aside from preventing an outright default. The rescue scheme ignores the crucial ingredient of growth – without which Ireland will struggle to close its budget gap, resolve its banking crisis and pay off its debts. In fact, by forcing vicious austerity measures onto the Irish economy, the bailout will only make that turnaround more difficult.

To put it simply, the entire bailout mechanism forged by the EU leaves too many questions unanswered, and thus will keep financial markets jittery. That doesn’t bode well for the fates of the Eurozone’s other weak members, especially Portugal and Spain, whose bonds have also been punished recently. Spain’s finance minister already came out to claim Spain is not Ireland. That foreshadows the possibility that events with Portugal and Spain could follow the same course we’ve seen with Greece and Ireland – a combination of denial, delay and investor doubt that causes a self-fulfilling deterioration in financial markets.

I’m not saying that Spain and Portugal will inevitably suffer the same fate as Greece and Ireland. Each economy is different, and hopefully investors will realize that. And there is a chance that Europe, by showing that it is committed to employing its $1 trillion fund, can stop the contagion at Ireland’s shores. Perhaps officials in Spain and Portugal can implement the reforms to keep investors appeased.

But the case of Ireland shows that even reform might not be enough to hold off a crisis once markets get nervous. The government of Ireland has been universally praised for its upright handling of its banking crisis and budgetary woes, but that wasn’t enough to save them.

Even more, the ad hoc way in which Europe is handling its debt crisis – acting only when pushed to the precipice, with a program in which the stronger Eurozone members impose pain on the weaker – isn’t tackling the roots of that crisis. That’s why all of the previous steps taken by the EU– the Greek bailout, the trillion dollar fund, EU reform proposals – haven’t stemmed the crisis. What the Eurozone requires is a proactive effort to engage its problems in a more comprehensive way, helping the weaker members to resolve their debts and return to healthy growth, not just saddling them with further debt to prevent losses at European banks. Unfortunately, based on the evidence of the past year, Europe’s leaders are going to continue to muddle through, hoping they don’t have to do more than they’ve already done. I fear that won’t be enough.

Related Topics: Economy & Policy, Wall Street & Markets
  • Latest on Business

    Brendan McDermid / Reuters

    Facebook’s Stock Falls Below $30 for First Time

    (NEW YORK) — Facebook’s stock has fallen below $30 for the first time since its much-awaited public debut this month.

    The Jury Is Out on the EuroSlate

    U.S. consumer prices rose faster than expected in May. (Mario Anzuoni / Reuters)

    Consumer Confidence in the Economy Plunged in May

    NEW YORK — American confidence in the economy suffered the biggest drop in eight months as worries about the weak jobs, housing and stock markets rattled them again. The decline comes after a few months of optimism amid some positive economic news.

  • waynebernard

    This is a bailout (to the tune of £7 billion) that the taxpayers of the greatly indebted United Kingdom simply cannot afford as noted in this article:

    http://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2010/11/can-united-kingdom-help-ireland.html

  • http://simonls25.wordpress.com simonls25

    Agree 100% with comment 1. As a Briton I can see this decision as the most irresponsible one our government has taken recently, and THAT is saying something.

    The problem for Ireland was caused in the main by MEDIA COVERAGE and by the financial investors and their skittish behaviour. If the media kept its beak out of things in which they have no interest. Were it not for the scare-mongering the financiers would not have bailed-out and the problem would have been averted. Let us hope, for Portugal and Spain, not to mention the EU that they rein in the media’s rantings as the cost of their cries will be too substantial to contemplate.

    As I said the other day, the blame for all this lies firmly on the idiocy of the Clinton administration and their disregard for bank greed when they effectively tore up Glass-Steagall, a bad day for all. Intentional? I believe so. When you look at the recent history books you cannot help but wonder what the ulterior motive behind the US’s decision making process. Perhaps it is time that the American people replace the government they have at present, the whole system, they are clearly not acting either in the interests of the world but to the US more importantly they are not acting in YOUR interests. The only groups benefitting from this are the big businesses and the money men. The echoes are not unlike those in the days of British Empire, the Ameerican people are letting their government act in the interests of the minority and not the people. Time for a change, not just in the US but in all the world. It is time the people took control back from the corporate entities that are pulling the strings of their puppet politicians.

  • http://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

    Actually, what the Eurozone needs is either of the following:

    1. The EU nations to return to Monetary Sovereignty or.
    .
    2. The EU to give, not lend, money to the EU nations.
    .
    Lending money to people who already are overburdened with debt is the worst possible “solution.” It’s what the U.S. banks did to mortgage borrowers, that precipitated the recession.
    .
    Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

  • duduong

    By monetary sovereignty, you seem to be referring to the ability to borrow in and to unilaterally depreciate one’s own currency. This is not an option for Ireland (or, in fact, any country other than the US) because, even if it had its own currency back and chose to depreciate its way out of its past profligacy, the bond market will not look kindly on a borrower who just destroyed previous investments. The US’ unique advantage is not that the FED can print unlimited dollars but that the dollar is the world’s reserve currency and the hapless surplus nations have to pile their wealth back into US bonds no matter how badly they are taken advantage of. Of course, there is no free lunch under the sun. The price for being able to waive a magic wand to make the debts go away is the risk that the world will start looking for alternatives to the dollar. The chances are, by 2030 when the US has a structural deficit in excess of $1T, the dollar will not be the reserve currency any more and no degree of “monetary sovereignty” will help avoid the pain necessary to right the economy.

  • quantumplanner

    Rodger Malcolm,

    Thank you for saying more about your ideas concerning the power of monetary sovereignty. I find it an interesting argument, but on the intuitive level it sounds a little too simple, The concerns raised about the impact on inflation (yes now we are struggling to prevent deflation so some safety zone may exist); about the lack of truth wealth creation from printing money; and the issue of how the printed dollars are actually spent (to help the poor, help the unemployed versus recapitalize banks that will not lend) make a huge difference. This seems much more complicated that just print money and the government and tax payers are majically off the hook. I also wonder about the fact that as the dollar is the world’s reserve currency, some external backlash against such a policy might have huge unforeseen impacts.

  • http://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

    quantumplanner,
    .
    Your key words were, “. . . but on the intuitive level . . .” In science, intuition can be misleading. Those, who are willing to allow facts to overcome intuition, learn something. Those relying on intuition have no need for learning.

    The facts are:

    1. Since we went of the gold standard in 1971, there has been no relationship between federal spending and inflation. (See: http://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com/2010/04/06/more-thoughts-on-inflation/)

    2. I don’t know what you mean by “wealth,” but depending on your definition, either money is wealth or it helps create wealth.

    3. A growing economy requires a growing supply of money; money growth stimulates economic growth; a recession is a lack of money.

    4. Sans inflation, there can be no “external backlash (whatever that is) to money creation.

    These are facts, not intuition. I would be glad to provide links that provide the appropriate data, if you are interested.

    Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

  • quantumplanner

    Rodger,

    You come off as combative, but maybe that is my read of you. A couple of comments:

    Facts are not nuetral, it depends on how one looks at them to percieve meaning. People interpret facts to mean all kinds of thing which in many cases end up being part of the story. So I caution you on the power you seem to indicate exist in “facts.”

    Wealth of course can have various meanings, but in the context I am using it I am refering to products and services that create real value for human life such as shelter, health, comfort, and opportunities for making life better in general. The money price of these things can go up without increasing their effective value, thus I have some caution about money for money sake.

    As it relates to the value of intuition, just let me say pure intellect is over-rated versus whole body and whole person intelligence. I saw a T-shir that summed this up for me: Good decisions are not made by the numbers but by knowledge and wisdom. In my experience facts need context including cultural, emotional and spiritual context. IMHO intuition helps (I think Malcom Gladwell has made a few million bucks on this topic).

blog comments powered by Disqus