Turkey: Limping From One Financial Crisis to Another
Kavaljit Singh
Hardly a
few weeks passed since Turkey
faced a serious banking crisis in December 2000, a fresh financial crisis
erupted again in the country in the last week of February 2001. As mentioned in
my previous article on the Turkish financial crisis (visit www.ased.org) the
country had faced a severe crisis during November-December 2000. The overnight
inter-bank interest rates climbed as high as 1700 per cent while domestic
interest rates reached 60 percent. Fearing an impending liquidity crisis,
foreign investors immediately took their money out from Turkey. The
exodus of foreign funds was so sudden and swift that nearly $6 billion left the
country within a week. On 22nd November alone, $2.5 billion left Turkey. The
calm in financial markets was restored when the International Monetary Fund
(IMF) announced a loan package of nearly US$10 billion.
The fresh
crisis began on February 19th when the Turkish Prime Minister Mr
Bulent Ecevit stormed out of a high-level meeting with President Ahmet Necdet
Sezer, saying a "serious crisis" had erupted with the President. The
Prime Minister was upset by the President's criticism of the government's
anti-corruption drive. These words uttered by the PM led to a sharp fall in the
financial markets and within hours interest rates jumped up. Fearing an
impending political crisis following this clash between the country's top
political leadership, overnight inter-bank lending rates reached an annualized
7,500 per cent and the stock market witnessed its worst crash in recent times,
losing nearly 18 per cent. This is despite the fact that Ecevit's three-party
coalition government is considered to be the most stable in the recent history
of Turkey.
The foreign
investors and creditors started panic buying of Euro to cover their exposure
from impending economic and political crisis. Within a day, the value of Euro
increased from $ 0.9233 to $ 0.9241. In particular, investors and creditors
from Germany were much
worried because they of their large exposure to Turkey. German banks are the
biggest lenders to Turkey.
Out of total US$ 43.88 billion, German banks have an exposure of US$ 12.12
billion while the US
banks have an exposure of US$ 4.7 billion. This is largely due to closer trade
ties between two countries and nearly two million Turks living in Germany. Just
last year, Germany's
Commerzbank and other large banks lend huge money to Turkish private sector and
the government.
In order to
defend the lira, the central bank of Turkey reportedly sold nearly $5
billion in the markets out of its total foreign exchange reserves of $28
billion. But, the panic in the financial markets was far from over. Over the
next two days, it became apparent that Turkey had very little choices
except to allow the lira to float freely or devalue the lira. As devaluation
would have badly affected the Turkish borrowers who borrowed in foreign
currency, the central bank decided to go for free float of lira. On February 22nd,
the central bank announced that it was scrapping Turkey's currency exchange rate
controls, a key element of its ongoing economic stabilization program, in order
to stem the financial crisis. Thus, the lira was allowed to float freely. Given
the nervousness in the markets, the free float of lira led to a loss of 36 per
cent of its value against the dollar in just two days. Soon thereafter, the
Turkish central bank governor, Gazi Ercel, one of the main architects of the
ongoing IMF-backed stabilization program, offered to resign on moral grounds.
In such a
panic gripped environment, the Turkish government appointed two technocrats to
the posts of economy minister and central bank governor in order to give
credibility to its economic stabilization program and restore the confidence of
financial markets and international financial institutions. Kemal Dervis, an
economist working as Vice-President of the World Bank, was appointed as
Economic Minister while Sureyya Serdengecti was appointed as the new governor
of the central bank. The appointment of Kemal Dervis was fully backed by the
IMF. Mr. Dervis has been given sweeping powers with treasury, planning and
privatization departments under his control. But the appointment of Kemal
Dervis as a "super minister" led to a new crisis when Zekeriya
Temizel, head of the banking regulation and supervision agency, resigned in
protest within hours of Mr Dervis appointment. He refused to work under the Mr.
Dervis. Mr Temizel, well known for his honesty and integrity, was appointed in
September 2000 to clean up the banking sector from corrupt politicians and
their cronies who had misused lax banking regulations for personal gains.
There is no
disagreement that the appointment of Mr Dervis will help in getting financial
support from the IMF, World Bank and the international financial community, but
whether he alone can restructure the entire economy and put it on a sustainable
growth path remains to be seen. In the past too, several developing countries
including Pakistan and India have
appointed technocrats at top level political positions to achieve economic
miracles but the results have been totally disastrous. Thereby corroborating
the fact that macroeconomic problems are complex, deep-rooted and structural in
nature which cannot be fixed by one individual alone.
While much
of attention during the crisis has been focussed on the fate of international
investors and lenders, there is very little concern on the impact of the
livelihoods of workers, students, small traders, daily wage earners and
farmers. It is important to emphasize here that these sections of society are
already bearing the burnt of the 14-month-old stabilization program supported
by the IMF. In an interview to International
Herald Tribune (February 26, 2001), Ergun Duran, 54, who runs a small Istanbul newspaper stand
stated, "You become poorer and poorer after every crisis…But at some
point, you cannot be poorer than you already are - you are on the bottom. This
is how most of the people are living now. You work and work for 20 or 30 years,
you still can't make ends meet, you still wear the same clothes every
year." The 10 percent hike in gasoline prices will fuel another round of
price hike of many essential goods. Thus, it is the poor and lower middle classes
that will be badly affected by the price increases and new taxes.
In the
coming days, there would be large-scale restructuring of the banking sector
which, in turn, would lead to further closing down of the banks and massive
layoffs. The sharp decline in the Turkish lira would lead to the failure of
several small Turkish banks, as they are not in position to repay loans owed in
foreign currencies. The Turkish government has already announced its commitment
to sell-off the Turk Telekom and Turkish Airlines besides cutting down
agricultural subsidies and cuts in public spending.
Apart from
economic issues, there is an important geo-political angle to these
developments in Turkey.
The US has been a strong
support of Turkey because
the US trusts Turkey as a close
ally to support its interests in this region. The US
also sees Turkey
as a "secular bulwark" against the political Islam. Given the
country's strategic location, particularly in the oil and mineral rich Caspian
region, the US would do its
best to provide financial support to Turkey in times of such economic
crises. Thus, Turkey
may continue to receive the backing from the US-controlled financial
institutions such as the IMF and World Bank. But, whether such financial
support is really helping Turkey
to attain financial stability and sustainable economic growth is the moot
question to be posed before the US
administration.