« | Home | »

Where would the money come from?

Tags: |

You can understand how they might be grouchy at UBS, the Swiss bank that reckons it has lost $2.3 billion through alleged jiggery-pokery by one of its employees, Kewku Adoboli, only three years after the bank was bailed out by the Swiss government. When one of UBS’s economists, George Magnus, says that French banks are now the ones that need to be bailed out – as he did this morning in the Financial Times – you might suspect a tinge of schadenfreude.

But Magnus was only backing up the words of Mohamed El-Erian, head of the financial leviathan Pimco, in the same paper. And when Magnus invokes the spectre of the collapse in May 1931 of the Austrian bank Kreditanstalt, the event generally seen as having made the economic depression that began in the United States in 1929 both Great and global, you sit up and take notice. When multinational efforts to save Kreditanstalt, a huge commercial bank, foundered on national rivalries, the effects rippled outwards with terrifying speed: there was a run on German banks, sterling was devalued, and in the US, bank after bank went belly-up between October and January of the following year.

Why do matters suddenly look so bleak for the French banks? A few years ago they were congratulating themselves on avoiding the rescues the US and British governments had been forced to carry out when banks lent too much money to home buyers who couldn’t afford to pay it back. Even as they preened, however, the French banks were lending money to governments in southern Europe, and borrowing American money to do it.

What toxic mortgages were to the Royal Bank of Scotland and HBoS in 2008, to put it crudely, southern European bonds may be to BNP Paribas, France’s biggest bank, in 2011. As Alastair Darling reminded us recently, the Treasury stepped in to save those British banks when they were within minutes of switching off their cash machines.

Baudouin Prot, the director general of BNP Paribas, was in the French financial paper Les Echos this morning, blithely assuring the world that everything was fine, even as his bank’s shares slid. ‘The bank’s working normally,’ he said. ‘It has no problem other than its share price… once the uncertainty about Greece’s future and over the euro has come to an end, bank share prices will reflect their intrinsic value.’

As soon as everything is fine, in other words, everything will be fine. The trouble is that Prot’s institution is an intimate part of the sick organism that he presents as being external to it. And everything with BNP Paribas is not fine. Along with two other French banks, Crédit Agricole and Société Générale, it owns billions of euros worth of bonds issued by a government (Greece’s) that is widely expected to default. The Royal Bank of Scotland owns the same kind of Greek bonds as BNP, and yet BNP claims its Greek bonds are somehow worth one and a half times more than the Royal Bank’s. They can’t both be right. The FT reported yesterday that BNP executives were trawling the Middle East for somebody new to borrow money from.

If France needs to bite the bullet and rescue its big banks, you might think, so what? Britain and America did it, and they like nationalising things in France, so why not? The question – and here the comparison with Kreditanstalt in 1931 gets interesting – is where the money would come from. Christine Lagarde, the former French finance minister who now runs the IMF, caused ire in elite European circles in August when she said (without being specific about her own country’s banks) that European banks had an urgent need for huge wodges of new money, or ‘recapitalisation’ as the charming euphemism of the trade has it.

But rather than individual European governments rescuing their own country’s banks, Lagarde suggested the big pot of money the Eurozone has set aside to help governments in trouble could be used instead. Others have taken up this call. Think about the implications. The self-visualised ‘provident’ citizens of Germany, Netherlands, Finland and Austria are already unhappy about, as they see it, bailing out the ‘improvident’ Greek, Portguese and Irish governments. How will they feel if they are asked to stump up even more, on top of this, to bail out fat cat French bankers who got into trouble lending to those same Greeks? There is as yet no strong populist nationalist party in Germany, as there was in 1931, to leverage that unhappiness into power, and only a tiny fraction of the poverty, misery and resentment there was then. Yet history suggests that if a deep enough sense of ‘enough, no more’ forms, a political mouth will eventually coalesce to articulate the words, as surely as water flows to lower ground.

Comments on “Where would the money come from?”

  1. Geoff Roberts says:

    The banks are still making vast profits, in spite of these little local difficulties. The Deutsche Bank CEO forecasts a 20% profit this year. He has kept the bank out of the headlines (except for deciding that he wants to head the Supervisory Board when he stops being CEO) and his London employees are working hard to do what the boss wants. The banks’ owners set the targets and at the moment these can be best reached by borrowing money from the central Eurobank at 0.5% (or whatever the rate may be) and lending this to other banks or to governments at 6.5-9%, depending on what S & P and their owners decide is the going rate for that particular country.
    Kewku Adoboli is just a fall guy. He was doing what his boss tells him and stepped over the line. So he boobed? Too bad. The trouble is that it’s all funny money, virtual dollars, €, and Yen, looking for a perch for the night and has nothing to do with the production, sale or purchase of anything except more virtual money. It’s time to stop the game, restructure the whole banking system and start again.

  2. Geoff Roberts says:

    Anybody need some collateral? How about this?

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.

  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • name on Who is the enemy?: Simply stating it is correct doesn't make it so, I just wish you would apply the same epistemic vigilance to "Muslim crimes" as you do to their Hebrew...
    • Glen Newey on Unwinnable War: The legal issue admits of far less clarity than the simple terms in which you – I imagine quite sincerely – frame them. For the benefit of readers...
    • Geoff Roberts on The New Normal: The causes go back a long way into the colonial past, but the more immediate causes stem from the activities of the US forces in the name of freedom a...
    • sol_adelman on The New Normal: There's also the fact that the French state denied the mass drownings of '61 even happened for forty-odd years. No episode in post-war W European hist...
    • funky gibbon on At Wembley: If England get France in the quarter finals of Euro 16 I expect that a good deal of the fraternity will go out the window

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

  • From the LRB Archive

    Edward Said: The Iraq War
    17 April 2003

    ‘This is the most reckless war in modern times. It is all about imperial arrogance unschooled in worldliness, unfettered either by competence or experience, undeterred by history or human complexity, unrepentant in its violence and the cruelty of its technology.’

    David Runciman:
    The Politics of Good Intentions
    8 May 2003

    ‘One of the things that unites all critics of Blair’s war in Iraq, whether from the Left or the Right, is that they are sick of the sound of Blair trumpeting the purity of his purpose, when what matters is the consequences of his actions.’

    Simon Wren-Lewis: The Austerity Con
    19 February 2015

    ‘How did a policy that makes so little sense to economists come to be seen by so many people as inevitable?’

    Hugh Roberts: The Hijackers
    16 July 2015

    ‘American intelligence saw Islamic State coming and was not only relaxed about the prospect but, it appears, positively interested in it.’

Advertisement Advertisement