Keynote address on US financial turmoil and the future prospects for Asean economies


Speech by Anwar Ibrahim delivered at the CLSA Investor Forum in Hong Kong on Friday 26th September, 2008

What do you do when a financial behemoth implodes?

What can you say about free market capitalism when the world’s leading liberal democracy dumps nearly a trillion dollars in private debt onto taxpayers? Are Freddie Mac and Fannie May along with Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, and AIG totally unforeseen victims of systemic once in a lifetime financial meltdowns or are they not really victims of their own greed? When you allow the “mushrooming of weapons of financial mass destruction,” to borrow a phrase from Warren Buffet then isn’t it written that you shall reap what you sow?

Anwar Ibrahim at CLSA Conference by Anwar Ibrahim.

The question is who should pay the price of Wall Street’s excesses. I learned in Economics 101 that those who live by the market must also die by the market. But with this gargantuan bailout it looks like the only thing that is dead is raw capitalism. Not that I’m complaining or that I ever subscribed to this thing called a totally free market. Some will recall that in my address in Bangkok last year I repeated my mantra that the free market is well and good but Adam Smith’s invisible hand may sometimes continue to be invisible if not altogether paralysed when the time for action draws nigh. Sometimes as it is in times like these, Uncle Sam’s hand may prove to be far quicker on the draw. Otherwise spontaneous order may well turn out to be spontaneous chaos.

Hayek is history, so they claimed.

Speaking of history, it would appear that the powers that be have learned some lessons. We know what happened in the 1930s when, adhering strictly to free market principles, the Federal Reserve folded its arms and did absolutely nothing even as the financial system was cracking under the weight of massive defaults that eventually caused the collapse of the American economy and the contagion spread to Europe. There would have been lessons learned too from the October 87 crash, and the savings and loans scandal. Then of course, there was the 1997 Asian financial crisis.

As for the latter, Asian countries having experienced the pains of the financial meltdown which saw their currencies plunging to the depths, are now having generally stronger balance sheets. Regardless whether or not they swallowed the bitter pill of IMF prescriptions, they now have better current accounts than they had ten years ago. But what exactly were the lessons learnt? Is it that we can snicker at the U.S. and tell ourselves that we don’t need to listen to you, because we are far better off now? Is it that we don’t need market economy and the related principles?

Why talk about the sanctity of free markets and the importance of non-interference by governments when the bastion of free market itself is now engaged in the biggest bail out exercise?

Some leaders are now gloating over their so called successes in resorting to bailouts even much earlier and retrospectively sanitising their remedies of capital controls and the policy of currency. This is a false premise. Bailouts cannot be used as a veneer for crony capitalism. It appears rather foolhardy for certain leaders in the region to start thumping their chests over their relatively wealthier positions and that they have strong fundamentals.

Are the fundamentals that strong?

To get the analogy of true strength let me relate some lines from Tu Fu (Du Foo) one of the greatest Chinese poets and contemporary of Confucius; also a well known sage of the Tang Dynasty:

And so firm is the deep root, So established underground, That its lone lofty boughs Can dare the weight of winds, Its only protection the Heavenly Power, Its only endurance the art of its Creator

The convulsions that began the last summer arising from the subprime crisis have morphed into a full blown seizure the implications of which have left us still groping in the dark. Aggravated no doubt by record breaking inflationary pressure, the current crisis has reached such a level that the threat of a worldwide recession looms. The hysteria, irrational as it is, is real. We saw the run on the U.S. financial institutions and the consequences unleashed. And as we all know, even Hong Kong hasn’t been spared—this week two typhoons scored near misses on the city, one a torrent of rain that passed to the south, and the other entailed a long line of depositors lined up outside the Bank of East Asia. With emotions running tense, we could certainly benefit from a return to sanity.

Even though the locus of the slaughter is the United States, the bastion of free ‘market’ democracy, yet, in many ways the current upheaval bears some similarities to the Asian crisis. We would think that the lessons learnt from the Asian crisis, in particular the Asean region, could help us navigate the treacherous waters that we may be heading towards.

At the end of the day, we are looking at a credit fiasco gone haywire. Both concern loan defaults which trigger a chain of consequences ending in massive losses for financial institutions. Like the crisis in the Asean region, there are without a doubt serious issues of governance, transparency and accountability at stake.

As I said back in 1998 at a forum in New York chaired by Maurice Greenberg, who was the AIG chief, I had likened the Asian crisis to the sinking of the Titanic. (I am talking about the AIG then, the financial Rock of Gibraltar, solid and unshakable, not the fallen giant of today.) Prior to the meltdown, there was the euphoria among the Asian leaders about the so-called East Asian miracle and all skeptics were dismissed as naysayers and those calling for fiscal restraint, including myself, were branded as doomsday prophets. Then the crash came. But the question is who the real victims were. Undoubtedly they were the ordinary people while cronies and family members of political leaders were given the life boats and the first to be bailed out.

In this regard, social justice must remain one of the main purposes of government. The proponents of free market may not want to admit it let alone utter the dirty word because the mantra is that state intervention should be avoided like the plague. But it is once again all too apparent that, left unchecked and unregulated, the consequence of markets running amok is not just gross inequalities of income distribution but systemic failure altogether.

We are looking at foundational weaknesses. Apart from the obvious issue of risks management, I believe that the global financial architecture and the institutions need structural reform. Make no mistake. We are not here to advocate command economies of the Orwellian kind but we can no longer be in a state of denial as to efficacy of a common sense approach to managing the economy. This is also very much in line with the demands of social cohesion and political stability.

Though we believe in a well-regulated market, where contracts should be honoured and the principles of fair dealing applied, we also know that a heavily-regulated market, coupled with highly opaque government operations cripples the economy and discourages investment. And it would be a grave error to think that governments have a duty to bail out badly run institutions and companies. Moral hazard cannot be simply dismissed as just another Bretton Woods construct. Among the most important lessons appears to be if you keep on spending money which is not yours, sooner or later it will take its toll.

In this regard, we view with great consternation the path that Malaysia has been taking in the last five years. Public-sector spending rose to RM200 billion annually from RM160 billion in 2004. That of course doesn’t include the slush funds in excess of RM30 billion used at the discretion of the Prime Minister. The national debt has gone up by another RM100 billion and as more money is being spent, the fiscal deficit has risen to 4.8% of GDP this year.

With capital flight at a record high since the 1997 crisis, RM125 million in 2008 already, Malaysian investment abroad now exceeds inward foreign investment. We are facing a double barrel onslaught of our own doing with the Ringgit hitting all time lows since 2005 and inflation a record high of 8.5%, the worst in 27 years.

Issues of governance and corruption are yet unresolved. The latest corruption perception index from Transparency International speaks for itself. In almost a decade Malaysia has hardly improved its position in the ranking while our would-be peers are making substantial improvements.

Our agenda for Malaysia is clear. Revive the lagging economy by adopting market friendly policies and take decisive action to cure the festering sore of corruption and cronyism that has decimated the judiciary, rendered the anti-corruption impotent and leeched billions of dollars from the state coffers – by Morgan Stanley’s account in the amount of at least $10 billion per year. Restore faith in the institutions of governance both domestically and internationally so that investors will once again find the country an attractive destination for their long-term investments. Among other things, this means strict adherence to the rule of law and an immediate end to draconian statutes that would allow the powers that be to detain their adversaries willy-nilly and without due process.

The issue of regime change is central to the current political scenario. The ability to handle a transition is a measure of the strength of the country’s democratic institutions. It can, and ought to be done, peacefully and orderly. Stability cannot be sacrificed on the altar of freedom no matter how intense the desire for change has become.

Weathering the storm of its own internal strife, it is apparent that populist spending is the easy way out for governments hell bent on clinging to power. On the contrary we would introduce structural reforms in public procurement programmes and the management of State companies while ensuring that adequate social safety nets are in place.

With the political will to combat corruption, wastage and mismanagement an 8% per annum growth rate is not unrealistic. Petronas should be made accountable to Parliament and not remain the private piggy-bank of the Executive Branch. We will remove restrictions on foreign capital inflows and outflows and revamp government protection of monopolies in industries like telecommunications and banking.

If our markets are strong and unfettered, and if our laws are transparent and enforced by impartial judges, we will not need special development corridors or regions to attract investment. A stable and clean business environment is far more important than special tax breaks and quotas handed out by a corrupt and opaque government.

With compassionate policies in place, the rifts caused by unequal development will finally begin to heal. Just as importantly, poor bumiputeras will finally be able to access economic aid that trickles all the way down instead of disappearing long before it reaches them.

The central principle of these economic policies is that the right opportunities must be made available to every single Malaysian –to learn, to earn an honest living, and to realise their dreams.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

When the Asian Crisis struck ten years ago, the decisions I made as Finance Minister were not populist nor were they popular. On principle, I felt they were the right moves even though it was at the expense of my personal freedom. Yet in my darkest hours of solitary confinement I had never given up hope that something good was to come of the ordeal. And now after more than a decade of struggle and profound challenges we are on the threshold of a new beginning.

Thank you.

15 thoughts on “Keynote address on US financial turmoil and the future prospects for Asean economies

  1. “Hayek is history, so they claimed.”

    Salma Hayek?? 🙂

    Didn’t know Anwar is a fan of Salma Hayek!


    __________
    No, Mr. Bean, it is not Salma Hayek, it is Nobel Laureate in Economic Science,Friedrich August von Hayek, the author of The Road to Serfdom. The book was required reading in my first year economics at University of Malaya (1960). Hayek also wrote The Constitution of Liberty . You are a born joker!—Din Merican

  2. ANWAR SAID;

    When the Asian Crisis struck ten years ago, the decisions I made as Finance Minister were not populist nor were they popular. On principle, I felt they were the right moves even though it was at the expense of my personal freedom. Yet in my darkest hours of solitary confinement I had never given up hope that something good was to come of the ordeal. And now after more than a decade of struggle and profound challenges we are on the threshold of a new beginning.

    WHAT was he talking about? He thought he made the right moves by following the IMF-esque prescription?

    In the first half of his article, he defended the move by US to bail out the companies. Which by the way, the opposite way of the IMF back in 1998. Of which he applaud the US for making the right moves in saving US from bankruptcy.

    Towards the end of his article, he contradicts himself and said what he did in 1998 was good.

    Does he even know what he is talking about?

    HE ALSO SAID:

    Prior to the meltdown, there was the euphoria among the Asian leaders about the so-called East Asian miracle and all skeptics were dismissed as naysayers and those calling for fiscal restraint, including myself, were branded as doomsday prophets. Then the crash came. But the question is who the real victims were. Undoubtedly they were the ordinary people while cronies and family members of political leaders were given the life boats and the first to be bailed out.

    HELLO ANWAR?

    The Govt was helping the ordinary people actually! You were the one who tried to ruin their lives by increasing the BLR up to 25% back then and trying to stop giving subsidies for controlled food items!

    He thinks he can fool everyone?!

    Only the young or ppl suffering amnesia would forgot what he did.

  3. Pingback: Keynote Address On US Financial Turmoil And The Future Prospects For ASEAN Economies « Fadhilmatsaad

  4. Sorry Anwar Ibrahim, you cannot have it both ways. If you had kept youself to the basics without drifting all over the place, we might have got a little more economic sense in this speech.

    Economics is no different from life in general (precisely DU FU’s message). Too rigid an ideology and you come a cropper. Free Market Capitalism is today’s example (by no means the only one). For years it has been shoved down the throats of lesser countries…until the very High Priests of this ideology find themselves in deep trouble…and suddenly it is “welcome to the world of mega bailouts”.

    May not be very fashionable to say this but our Dr. Mahathir got it right during the Asian crisis and was (begrudgingly) acknowleged for it.

  5. Anwar is barking up the wrong tree.

    His focus should not be overseas, Klang Valley, or in the Pakatan States. His focus should be in the non pakatan states, in the Malay constituents.

    His message to international financiers and economists should be scheduled later. What he needs to do is to ensure that the rural Malays understands his message.

    I hope someone close to Anwar will try to show him the negative reception he is likely to get in the southern state of Johor. This is where he is weak, and this is where his focus should be.

    As for the monetary policies stated, I think none of you guys knows what you are talking about, so I wont bother to get into the gibberish.

  6. DSAI always does us proud in the lobal circuit. None others can lay such claims.

    Not only does he present his viewpoints without fear or hints of shame, but does so with conviction and fire in the belly.

    Malaysia needs such leaders desperately.

  7. Anwar Ibrahim was in Hongkong yesterday to meet and deliver a keynote speech on Pakatan Rakyat’s investor friendly economic policies which will be implemented when he assumes the premiership of Malaysia. It has to be read together with the Malaysian Economic Agenda for a humane economy (Growth with Distributive Justice).

    His Administration will manage the economy prudently with emphasis on good governance and enhancing national productivity so that we are competitive in regional and global markets.

    His approach is a variation of John Kenneth Galbraith ( read JKG’s “The Good Society: The Humane Agenda” and his son, James. K Galbraith’s “The Predator State” [2008]) and Paul Krugman (read his book, “The Conscience of a Liberal”),adapted to the realities of the Malaysian condition. Anwar was consistently pro-Distributive Justice, even when he was at the University of Malaya in the 1970s. So, he cannot in 1998 be pro-IMF and World Bank.

    Market yes, justice yes. That is why Anwar said “Hayek is history, so they claim”. But Hayekian ideas still have value, but not as panacea.

    In my view, Anwar has been able to present his message well. The question and answer session was also very good. When the video is processed, I will post it on this blog. Or or you can go direct to his blog, http://www.anwaribrahimblog.com.

    To fair to Anwar, we must recognise that Mahathir never gave him a chance to implement his economic ideas and plans as he was unceremoniously removed from office in September 1998. This is because Mahathir’s cronies were hurt by the East Asian economic crisis, and Anwar was against unconditional bailouts.

    We were lucky that selective controls worked. But to reintroduce that again to defend the ringgit is risky because circumstances have changed. In 1997 we had 72 tonnes of fine gold in our reserves; today, we have 11 tonnes (August 2008). In 2008, our fundamentals are weak, and our fiscal deficit is 4.8 per cent of GDP. Even our stock market is languishing in red territory and investor confidence has dissipated. Our politics is dangerously racial and the rural sector is neglected by the elistist UMNO-BN government.

    Your comments are welcome, especially from those sentimentalists who are enamoured with the past.—Din Merican

  8. I don’t think Abdullah has lost nor Muhyiddin has won. Najib has won nothing either.

    This is the usual UMNO sandiwara – a party is utter disarray with each group trying to pull the rug from the other’s feet.

    If indeed Abdullah has decided to step down and hand over power to Najib, why the need to wait till Oct 9 for his final decision. All the details should have been hammered out yesterday itself.

    Abdullah and his supporters still believe that he can secure the 58 nominations to defend his seat. Hasn’t he said, “I am in command” several times recently?

    He wouldn’t relinquish his lofty Emperor’s position just to please a few dissidents in the supreme council.

    I think he will wait till the 199 nominations are in before he throws in the towel, if at all. The likelihood is, he will defend his post and concede defeat only if loses in the party polls in March 2009.
    And with the advantage of incumbency he might just make it.

    His, his son’s, son-in-law’s and his hangers-on’s interests are too huge for him to let go of his premiership so easily. They will not let him step down without a fight.
    This is not only about the premiership but the “economic empire.”

  9. “The proponents of free market may not want to admit it let alone utter the dirty word because the mantra is that state intervention should be avoided like the plague. ” Anwar

    The U.S. is a capitalistic economy. The Republicans would like to see the government remain small and let the individual through the free market mechanism decide what he or she wants. The state should not be taking over the role that rightly belongs to the individual in a democracy.

    The mention of the word “socialism” or even the economics of wealth distribution sends shivers up their spines.

  10. Whatever the differences between Anwar and Mahathir the fact remains that Mahathir’s medicine did the trick with the least pain. Give credit where it is due – without taking this to be a blanket endorsement of his subsequent behaviour.

    Extremes of any ideology do not work and economics is no exception. The fact that so many proponents of both unfettered free market capitalism and the opposite extreme of socialism do not or will not see that there CAN be a sensible middle ground explains the current scenario unfolding.

    As for monetary policies I would like to beg Mr. James Chua to (briefly) enlighten us with his
    expertise on the subject. Will be much appreciated sir.

  11. Pingback: Fret not! Anwar Ibrahim is helping the US economy « Jebat Must Die

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.