The IMF liaisons and some questions

Posted in economics by jrahman on September 14, 2010

Anoop Singh, the International Monetary Fund’s Director of Asia Pacific Department, recently visited Bangladesh.  After meeting him, and the IMF Mission Chief David Cower and Resident Representative Eteri Kvintradze, our finance minister Mr Muhith said:

We’ve earlier sought IMF assistance for implementation of the Poverty Reduction Strategy-II (PRS-II). We hope to get US$ 1 billion from them in the next two to three months.

Mr Singh also met the Prime Minister during the trip.

Shortly after the trip, Bangladesh Bank bought 10 tons of gold for $403m. 

So, what’s going on?  Short answer: gold sale is okay, free or cheap money is okay, but there are important questions about where the buck stops.

The first thing to note is, there is a lot conspiracy theory out there about the IMF being a tool of ‘American imperialism’ out to screw poor countries like us.  I remember explaining, unconvincingly, to many fellow anti-1/11 activists that the regime was not an IMF or World Bank imposed creature.  Whatever the consequences of specific IMF actions, these guys are not ‘evil people’ out to subjugate anyone.

And a related matter is, even if they were, the IMF actually doesn’t have much leverage over Bangladesh.  The IMF’s main job is to rescue countries with balance of payments difficulties — in English, this means if a country doesn’t have enough foreign currency to pay for its imports or meet payments on its foreign debts, the Fund will come and tell the country ‘here is some money, but you can only get it if you do what we tell you’ (the last bit is called ‘conditionality’ by wonks). 

Bangladesh doesn’t have a high foreign debt burden.  It hasn’t faced any difficulty in repaying its debts or paying for its imports.  If the Fund says ‘here is some money, but you must do X’, and if we think ‘X’ is bad for us, we can simply say ‘no thank you’.  So, if anything bad happens because of our liaisons with the Fund, the fault is as much ours as it is theirs.

With that cleared up, what liaisons have actually come to pass?

Well, we bought some gold.  The Fund is one of the largest holders of gold in the world.  It’s selling some of its reserves to pay for extra staff that are needed to assist troubled countries like Greece or Pakistan.  You can read more about it here.

Why is Bangladesh Bank buying gold?  Well, Bangladesh Bank needs reserves to protect taka’s de facto peg against the dollar, and be the lender of last resorts should our private sector find itself in payments difficulties.  As it happens, the Bank has a lot of reserves — over$10b as of last December, enough to pay for five months of imports.  The thing is, most of this is in dollar.  And the outlook for dollar, and the euro, is uncertain to say the least.  Seen from that light, a modest diversification into gold isn’t a bad idea.

And we are, indeed, talking about a modest diversification here.  Last year, India bought 200 tons of gold from the Fund for example.  And the financial market seems to be unperturbed about the whole thing. 

So the gold purchase doesn’t seem to be a big deal.  What about the $1b of ‘free money’?

Well, in its press release, the Fund mentions no money, free or otherwise.

The first para of the press release is simple statement of who visited whom.  The second para is about the economic outlook and challenges.  It’s the third para, reproduced below with emphasis added, that is of interest:

Based on these discussions, IMF staff intend to work closely with the Government in the coming months on a reform program, in consultation with key development partners, which could be supported by Fund’s new low-income country lending facilities. This program would aim to embrace key elements of the authorities’ reform agenda on tax policy and administration, public financial management, the financial sector, and trade policy, creating the conditions for broad-based growth, including by catalyzing greater private investment and maintaining a stable macroeconomic environment.

Okay, there could be some free, or at the least, cheap money.  Fine.  And for this, the IMF staff and development partners will help put together a ‘development program’.  And This raises a bunch of questions.

1. How does this ‘development program’ fit with the sixth five year plan or PRS-II or the government’s Vision 2021? 

2. Exactly what role will the IMF staff and development partners have vis-a-vis public servants (from the Finance Ministry or the Planning Commission) and local consultants? 

To stress, it’s not that there is a bunch of ‘evil IMF guys’ out to screw us.  That’s nonsense.  Rather, it’s important to understand exactly who is responsible for drawing up this ‘development program’.  We’ve already had some controversy about outsourcing the five year plan to a private firm — one whose founders have close personal ties with both senior government figures and the IMF / World Bank I might add. 

Controversies about economic policy aren’t sexy.  But we need to understand exactly who is drawing up plans for what.  This is important staff for democratic accountability, much more important than private lives of our politicians. 

(Cross-posted in UV)

Tagged with: ,

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. IMF visit: DWC and CPD takes said, on January 8, 2011 at 10:27 am

    […] the fold is what I wrote in the Independent Weekend Magazine on 22 October 2010, which is based on this 14 September post in Mukti.  I’ll write in detail on the CPD report […]

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: