Login Password      
Forgot your password? Registration
   Main page       Feedback       RSS               
Eurasian Home - analytical resource



BORIS  KAGARLITSKY, MOSCOW
PERMANENT DEVALUATION

Print version               


The Russian government has a reason to be quite happy. The oil price has reached this winter $41-42 for a barrel, which is half the price written in Russia’s 2009 budget, but which is better than $25-30 for a barrel that the oil market sought to fix in the autumn. It is not a surprise: oil prices have a tendency to come up in winter since it is cold in the northern hemisphere and the fuel demand is growing. When it gets warmer the oil will fall in price again against a background of the economic recession.

Incidentally, the Russian government believe that they have found a way out of the budget impasse: the ruble devaluation not only made more profitable the oil industry, which receives dollars for oil exports and pays cheap rubles for the production costs, but also allowed the Central Bank of the Russian Federation to earn a trillion rubles or more.

The politicians complain of unpatriotic bankers, who play against the ruble, but it is the Central Bank that is in the front line here. Russia’s gold and currency reserves have to be spent within the country indemnifying for the extremely deficit budget. The devaluation of ruble would make it possible to prolong this pleasure. Russia will have run out of the budget money by the middle of summer in any event, but the devaluation would make up for the budget gap for some time.

The point is that Russia’s financial institutions, while playing against the ruble, destroy the people’s savings, thus undermining the domestic market. As a result, tax receipts will decrease and the slowdown will be still sharper. Russia will run out of money in any case.

The country’s gold and currency reserves are shrinking rapidly. Under the circumstances, new devaluation has to be invented soon, or even devaluation can become a permanent process – a kind of the revolution in Lev Trotsky’s theories.

Such an approach has its good sides in terms of economy. Of course, it is bad but it is the least evil in comparison with other scenarios, for example the state bankruptcy that may take place soon.

However, the constant decline in the national currency has also a political and psychological aspect. When people come to distrust their national currency, the state, as a rule, ceases to enjoy authority over them.

After 2005 the government came to realize that if they ignored the pensioners’ interests, old people might revolt. That’s why the pension payment is getting the top priority, but the purchasing value of money is dropping. The private sector workers are found in desperate straits and experience all the crisis hardships. The manufacturing industry is the first to suffer, it produces goods in Russia but depends on purchasing foreign components. More expensive imports lead to the rise in prices of the Russian cars, household appliances and even food. Aggravation of the economic recession increases the number of those who are displeased. They include the young and vigorous people whose interests are sacrificed to the budget stabilization.

At the same time a grave education crisis unfolds: the deplorable consequences of neoliberal reforms join the negative economic factors. The students, who pay for their education, cannot do that any more. Charity projects are difficult to carry on, credits become more expensive or are not given, while the single state examinations may turn 50% of A-students into D-students. Rebellions may break out, but this time there will be no “uprising of old women” about which press tenderly and half-jokingly wrote four years ago. Instead, young, vigorous and embittered people are expected to rise in revolt.

It is possible that the government is ready to pay this price for a way out of the budget impasse or, at least, for determent of the financial collapse. But there is a question: will the current government remain in power after this price is fully paid?

Boris Kagarlitsky is Director of the Institute of Globalization and Social Movements

February 12, 2009



Our readers’ comments



There are no comments on this article.

You will be the first.

Send a comment

Your name:

Your opinion:




Other materials on this topic
Hot topics
Our authors
  John  Marone, Kyiv

YUSHCHENKO - THE DAY AFTER

29 January 2010


It is an established fact that Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko has lost his chance to be re-elected. His public support going into the first round on January 17 was dismally low, in what many saw as an indictment of the country’s 2004 Orange Revolution – a pro-Western popular uprising that lifted Yushchenko to power. However, the end of the Yushchenko era may not be as definitive as it seems.



  Boris  Kagarlitsky, Moscow

“FREEDOM” – WHAT A PLEASANT WORD!

28 January 2010


Last week the Heritage Foundation published the 2010 Index of Economic Freedom. According to that rating, Hong Kong is the world’s freest economy, it is much freer than the USA. Armenia is freer than Brazil, Estonia is much freer than Germany, and Kazakhstan is freer than India. Russian economy is not free, Tajikistan outstrips it.



  Aleh  Novikau, Minsk

A PREPARATORY YEAR

26 January 2010


While Russian and Belarusian officials were carrying on negotiations on the Russian oil prices, on which 50% of Belarus’ annual GDP depends, Minsk hosted the big hockey holiday. The local team of veterans with its unchallenged captain, Aliaksandr Lukashenka, played in a tournament to win the Belarusian President’s prize. Simultaneously, during the ceremony of granting awards to cultural workers, Aliaksandr Lukashenka delivered a long speech.



  Ivan  Gayvanovych, Kiev

IS MISSION IMPOSSIBLE?

14 October 2009


Against the background of social disappointments and political failures that have been taking place in Ukraine during Viktor Yushchenko’s presidency, the freedom of speech is considered to be one of the main achievements of the Orange Revolution. President Yushchenko likes to mention that in his speeches telling Ukrainians about the diffusion of democratic values in the country under his rule.



  Jules  Evans, London

COLD SNAP AFTER SPRING IN THE MIDDLE EAST

17 June 2009


As I write, angry demonstrations continue in Tehran and elsewhere in the Islamic Republic of Iran, over what the young demonstrators perceive as the blatant rigging of the presidential election to keep Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in power for another five years. Reports suggest at least eight protestors have been killed by police.



  Akram  Murtazaev, Moscow

GAS CONFLICT BETWEEN RUSSIA AND UKRAINE

14 January 2009


The result of the Russia-Ukraine gas conflict, which broke out by tradition on New Year's Eve, is quite predictable – the Russian gas will be supplied to the European consumers but Gazprom’s reputation has been seriously tarnished. In one of the most severe winters Europe does not receive gas, and though Russia tries to shift the blame onto Ukraine (its state collapse is evident), Moscow is also responsible for the conflict.



  Kevin  O'Flynn, Moscow

THE TERRIBLE C-WORD

08 December 2008


The cri… no the word will not be uttered. Now that President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin have finally allowed themselves to belatedly use the word, it’s becoming increasingly difficult for me to spit it out of these lips. It’s c-this and c-that. If there was C-Span in Russia then it would be c-ing all day and all night long.



Login Password      
Forgot your password? Registration
 events
 news
 opinion
 expert forum
 digest
 hot topics
 analysis
 databases
 about us
 the Eurasia Heritage Foundation projects
 links
 our authors
Eurasia Heritage Foundation
ßķäåźń öčņčšīāąķč˙