|
Bloody 'Liberalisation' in Argentina by Greg Palast IMF/World Bank 'eyes-only' memos show who done it 7 February 2002
In Buenos Aires, the Paris of Latin America, police
gunned down two dozen Argentines in December after they chose to face
bullets rather
than starvation. The nation's currency had crumbled and unemployment had
shot up
from a grim 16 percent to millions more than the collapsing government
could
measure. The economy had been murdered in cold blood.
Who done it? The killers left fingerprints all over the warm corpse.
A "Technical Memorandum of Understanding," dated September 5, 2000, was
signed by
Pedro Pou, president of Argentina's Central Bank for transmission to Horst
Köhler, managing director of the International Monetary Fund. I
received a
complete copy of the inside report from . . . let's just say the envelope
lacked a
return address.
The "understanding" required Argentina to cut the government budget
deficit from
$5.3 billion in 2000 to $4.1 billion in 2001. Think about that. Eighteen
months ago,
when the "understanding" was drafted, Argentina was already on the
cliff-edge of a
depression. One in six workers were unemployed. Even the half-baked
economists at
the IMF should have known that holding back government spending in a
contracting
economy would be like turning off the engines of an airplane in stall.
The IMF is never wrong without being cruel as well. Under the boldface
heading,
"Improving the Conditions of the Poor," the agency directed Argentina to
cut 20
percent from $200 monthly salaries paid under an emergency employment
program. The
"understanding" also promised a 12 to 15 percent cut in civil servant
salaries and a
pension "rationalization" (IMF-speak for a 13 percent cut in payments to
the
elderly).
Salted in the IMF plans for pensioners and the poor were economic
forecasts
bordering on the delusional. The report projected that, once Argentina
snuffed
consumer spending, somehow the nation's economic production would leap by
3.7
percent and unemployment would fall.
It didn't. The IMF plan kneecapped industrial production, which fell 25
percent
in the first quarter of last year before keeling over completely to
interest rates
that by summer were running up to 90 percent on dollar-denominated
earnings. ANOTHER ENVELOPE that walked onto my desk contained the memorandum for
Argentina's "Country Assistance Plan" for the next four years. The June 25
document,
signed by World Bank President James Wolfensohn, included a warning that
recipients
must use it "only in the performance of their official duties."
My duty as a reporter is to tell you that the plan amounts to a
breathtaking mix
of cruelty and Titanic-sized self- deception. With the economy already in
its death
spiral, Wolfensohn claimed that "despite the setbacks, the goals set out
in the last
[year's] report remain valid and the strategy appropriate." The IMF plan,
cooked up
with the World Bank, would "greatly improve the outlook for the remainder
of 2001
and for 2002, with growth expected to recover in the later half of 2001."
In this eyes-only document, the World Bank president expressed particular
pride
that Argentina's government had made "a $3 billion cut in primary
expenditures
accommodating the increase in interest obligations." In other words, the
government
gouged spending on domestic needs to pay interest to creditors, mostly
foreign
banks.
Crisis, indeed, has its bright side, as Wolfensohn crowed to his banker
readers:
"A major advance was made to eliminate outdated labor contracts." And
"labor costs"
had fallen due to "labor market flexibility induced by the de facto
liberalization
of the market via increased informality." Translation: Workers lost
unionized jobs
and turned to selling trinkets in the street.
What on Earth would lure Argentina into embracing this program? The bait
was a
$20 billion emergency loan package and "stand-by" credit from the IMF, the
World
Bank and their commercial bank partners. But there is less to this
generosity than
meets the eye. The "understanding" assumed Argentina would continue its
"Convertibility Plan," a 1991 policy that pegged the peso, the nation's
currency, to
the Yankee dollar at an exchange rate of one-to-one. The currency peg
hadn't come
cheap: Foreign banks working with the IMF had demanded that Argentina pay
a whopping
16 percent risk premium above U.S. Treasury lending rates for the dollars
needed to
back the scheme.
Now do the math. When Wolfensohn wrote his memo, Argentina owed $128
billion in
debt. Normal interest plus the premium amounted to $27 billion a year. In
other
words, Argentina's people didn't net one penny from the $20 billion in
"bailout"
loans. The debt grew, but none of the money escaped New York, where it
lingered to
pay interest to U.S. creditors holding the bonds.
The creditors range from big fish, led by New York-based Citibank, to
little
biters such as Steve Hanke, president of Toronto Trust Argentina, an
"emerging
market" fund. Hanke's outfit loaded up 100 percent on Argentine bonds
during a 1995
currency panic. Cry not for Steve, Argentina. His 79.25 percent profit
that year put
his fund at the top of the speculators' league. Players call it "vulture
investing":
betting on the failure of the IMF policies. In his day job as a Johns Hopkins University economics professor, Hanke
freely
offers a cure for Argentina's woes. The advice would put him out of
business:
"Abolish the IMF," he told me.
And, Hanke advised, abolish the one-for-one exchange rate. The currency
peg
forced Argentina to beg and borrow a steady supply of dollars to back each
peso, and
this became the rationale for the IMF and World Bank to let loose in the
pampas
their Four Horsemen of neoliberal policy: liberalized financial markets,
reduced
government, privatization and free trade.
The "liberalizing" means allowing capital to flow freely across national
borders.
Capital has indeed flowed freely. Last year, Argentina's elite dumped its
pesos for
dollars and sent the hard loot to investment havens abroad, bleeding as
much as $750
million a day from the country.
Once upon a time, government-owned national and provincial banks supported
their
nation's debts. But in the mid-1990s, President Carlos Saúl Menem's
government sold these off to foreign operators such as Citibank and
Boston-based
Fleet Bank. Former World Bank advisor Charles Calomiris told me these bank
privatizations were a "really wonderful story." Wonderful for whom? With
the
foreign- owned banks unwilling to repay Argentine depositors, the
government froze
savings accounts December 3, effectively seizing money from the middle
class to pay
off the foreign creditors.
To keep the foreign creditors smiling, the IMF "understanding" also
required
"reform of the revenue sharing system." This is the kinder, gentler way of
stating
that the U.S. banks would be paid by siphoning off tax receipts that the
provinces
had earmarked for education and other public services. The
"understanding" also
found cash in "reforming" (cutting from) the nation's health insurance
system.
And when cuts aren't enough to pay creditors, one can always sell
"grandma's
jewels," as Argentines describe the privatizations. The government sold
much of the
nation's water system in 1995 to Vivendi Universal. The French
conglomerate promptly
cut staff and raised prices, including 400 percent hikes in some areas. In
his
confidential memo, the World Bank's Wolfensohn sighs, "Almost all major
utilities
have been privatized," so now there's really nothing left to sell.
The coup de grâce, spelled out in the "understanding," was the
imposition
of "an open trade policy." This pushed Argentina's exporters (with their
products
priced in U.S. dollars, via the peg) into a pathetic, losing competition
against
Brazilian goods priced in that nation's devalued currency.
Have the World Bank and IMF learned from their errors? They learn the way
a pig
learns to sing: It can't, it won't and, if it tries, the resulting noise
is
unbearable. On January 9, with the Argentine capital in flames, IMF Deputy
Managing
Director Anne Krueger ordered the country's new president, Eduardo
Duhalde, to cut
still deeper into government expenditures. Interestingly, President George
W. Bush
backed the IMF budget-cutting advice-the same week he demanded that the
U.S.
Congress adopt a $50 billion scheme to spend the United States out of
recession.
WOLFENSOHN'S MEMO summed up the program: All Argentina needed to do was
"reduce
the cost of production," a step that required only a "flexible workforce."
Translation: further cuts in pensions and wages or, better yet, no wages
at all. To
the dismay of Argentina's elite, however, the worker bees proved
inflexibly
obstinate in agreeing to their impoverishment.
One such worker, Anibal Verón, a 37-year-old father of five, lost
his job
as a bus driver from a company that owed him nine months'
pay. Verón joined
unemployed Argentines, known as "piqueteros," who block roads. In November
2000,
while clearing a blockade, the military police killed him with a bullet to
the
head.
Yet globalization boosters portray resistance to the New World Order as a
lark of
pampered, naïve, western youths curing their ennui by "indulging in
protest,"
as British Prime Minister Tony Blair put it. The U.S. and European media
play to
this theme, focusing on protests in Seattle and Genoa, while burying news
of general
strikes honored by millions of Argentine workers. The July 20 killing of
Genoa
protester Carlo Giuliani made front pages across the United States and
Europe. But
these newspapers ignored Verón's death and the June 17 killings of
Argentine
protesters Carlos Santillán, 27, and Oscar Barrios, 17, gunned down
by police
in a churchyard in General Mosconi, a northern town. Only in December,
when
Argentina failed to make an interest payment on foreign-held debt, did the
Euro-American press report a "crisis."
To implement their "reforms," the IMF and World Bank work with locals such
as
Domingo Cavallo, who resigned as economy minister in December after mass
protests.
Argentines remember him as head of the nation's Central Bank during the
1976-1983
military dictatorship.
Mindful of that era, the Buenos Aires-based Peace and Justice Service
(SERPAJ) is
documenting cases in which police tortured northern protesters. SERPAJ
leader Adolfo
Pérez Esquivel, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1980, told me his
group has
filed a formal complaint charging police with recruiting children as young
as age 5
as informers for paramilitary squads. He compared the operation to the
Hitler Youth,
the organization that trained German boys in Nazi principles. Pérez
Esquivel,
who last year led protests against the proposed Free Trade Agreement of
the
Americas, says economic "liberalization" and political repression go hand
in
hand. _____________
Greg Palast is an investigative journalist who writes a column
called "Inside
Corporate America" for the Observer, Britain's most respected Sunday
newspaper. View
all of Greg's columns at
http://www.gregpalast.com
More information on this topic can be found in Greg's
latest books, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy and Democracy and
Regulation, both of which will be published in April.
_____________
home
|
subscribe
|
talk
|
help-about
|
back issues
|
resources
|