Log In  |  Register Now  
 Home | Syndication Services | Media Features | Research Center | Archive | Contributors | About Us

To receive emails containing headlines and highlights from The Globalist,
sign up here.



Topic

Companies

Culture

Development

Diplomacy

Economy

Environment

Finance

Health

History

Markets

Media

Music

Politics

Religion

Security

Sports

Technology

Women

Youth


Region

Africa

Asia-Pacific

Europe

Latin America

Middle East

North America


Globalist Bookshelf

Best Books of 2012

Best Books of 2011


Editorial Staff

Contributors

Jobs & Internships


Subscribers to The Globalist's premium services can log in here:

Username:

Password:

Forgot your password?



 

Taking hints from the White House?

Web Community > Global Politics
U.S. Monetary Policy: Between Iraq and a Hard Place?
 

By David Hale | Friday, June 21, 2002
 

The U.S. Federal Reserve often prides itself on refusing to bow to pressures and expectations. It often serves as the bearer of bad news to the global economy as well. But Globalist contributor David Hale argues that the Fed does occasionally bend to political pressure — and may do so again if the United States declares war on Iraq.


The odds are increasing that the Federal Reserve will delay the expected rise in interest rates for much longer than currently expected. Remarkably — although the Fed traditionally claims it only looks at the economy — the motives for this delay are both economic and political.

Rapid recovery

On the economic front, many Fed officials continue to harbor concerns about the underlying resilience of the U.S. recovery. They had expected demand to expand at an annual rate of only 3.0% during the first quarter of 2002 while the actual outcome was 2.7%.

They also do not see any compelling evidence that business-fixed investment is poised to recover. Furthermore, while they are stunned by the strength of consumer spending since October 2001, they wonder if it can be sustained.

Alan Greenspan is sensitive to military risks because he socializes with those who shape defense policy.

Other economic factors have also crept onto the radar. Fed officials recognize that rising interest rates could puncture the mortgage refinancing boom in the United States — and thus undermine a key for continued healthy consumer spending.

Finally, they are impressed by strong productivity numbers, and do not perceive threats from rising wages or commodity prices.

False alarm or true threat?

The Fed is concerned about the signs of the dollar's recent weakness. Yet, there have been many false alarms about a dollar correction in the past.

The dollar must drop further before anybody has real concerns about depreciation driving inflation higher. In short, Fed officials do not perceive any inflation risk in permitting the Federal Funds Rate to remain at 1.75% through the summer.

The Iraq factor

The main factor restraining monetary policy, though, is much more unusual for the Fed. It is political. Specifically, Fed officials are concerned about the risk of war in the Middle East — and the possibility of an oil price shock. They freely admit that oil prices are the major uncertainty in their economic outlook.

Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan is very sensitive to military risks — in part because he socializes with those in the Bush Administration who shape defense policy — including U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney.

Mr. Greenspan knows that the administration is determined to launch an attack on Iraq during the next nine months. In such a scenario, the oil price could spike into the $35 to $45 per barrel range for a few months — and remain there until the United States defeats Saddam Hussein.

Political demands

All of this is so intriguing because monetary policy has been shaped by factors outside the U.S. economy on three occasions since 1997. The first was the East Asian financial crisis of 1997 and 1998.

The odds are increasing that the Federal Reserve will delay the expected rise in interest rates for much longer than currently expected.

The second occasion was the Russian default of August 1998 — and its impact on the hedge funds through the bankruptcy of LongTerm Capital Management. The third was concern about Y2K-related economic disruptions in the run-up to the millennium transition in 2000.

During all three events, the Fed kept interest rates low in the face of a buoyant domestic economy and increasingly frothy equity markets. It did so to help the world economy cope with economic shocks that also promised to create major political tremors.

The decision to restrain interest rates because of risks associated with a war on Iraq looks to be the fourth time that the U.S. central bank has permitted non-economic factors to drive the conduct of monetary policy.




Join the discussion of this article on our Facebook page.

Follow The Globalist on Twitter.




Copyright © 2000-2013 by The Globalist. Reproduction of content on this site without The Globalist's written permission is strictly prohibited. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

The Globalist claims full trademark rights to The Globalist name and logos.

1100 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20036