Wednesday, December 30, 2015

The White Guard – Kudrin in Talks About Post In Putin Government


Reuters reports that Alexei Kudrin is in talks with the Kremlin about appointment to a senior economic post.


This is good news for the Russian economy.  Kudrin was previously Minister of Finance from 2000 to 2011 and is credited with skillful economic management and, most importantly, prudent government budget management, including pro-market tax and spending reforms and creation of the national Stabilization Fund, which has become an important tool in addressing the current economic crisis.  Kudrin’s experience with the budget is particularly valuable because the most important task in the coming year will be to manage the steeply deteriorating budget situation as oil revenue continues to fall far below the level assumed in the 2016 budget.  Kudrin is also a long-time associate of Putin’s from their days together in St. Petersburg in the 1990s as deputy mayors for Anatoly Sobchak, St. Peterburg’s liberal, reform-minded mayor.  Kudrin is reported to still advise and have the confidence of Putin.

As reported by Reuters though the idea suggests a lack of seriousness and window dressing.  Positions under consideration include some sort of senior economic policy coordinator or deputy to Prime Minister Medvedev.  Policy coordination without formal authority to command reforms—as, for instance, Minister of Finance—would be pointless because Kudrin could simply be ignored or undercut, especially by opponents of reform within government or entrenched interests, of which there are many.  Deputy to Medvedev is even more absurd.  Medvedev does not command the heights of economic policy making and is more often mentioned in press as Putin’s fall guy if the economy continues to deteriorate.

The notion of a Kudrin appointment seems to be more political than economic.   Putin and his inner circle may be counting on Kudrin’s presence in government to reassure markets just enough that they can ride out the virtually certain continuing fall in the economy and erosion of the government budget until after the September 2016 general parliamentary elections.  This suggests the Putin’s game plan is stonewalling rather than reform.


As  YN Harari writes in Sapiens, “The most important economic resource is trust in the future, and this resource is constantly threatened by thieves and charlatans.”  A Kudrin appointment that lacks seriousness will drive a very large nail into the Russian coffin.

The Kremlin and Kudrin should reread Bulgakov's The White Guard about the fall of Russia in 1917 to remind themselves about the consequences of war, political turmoil and social collapse (coincidentally, The White Guard, is set in Kyiv).

Saturday, December 5, 2015

Russia Enters 2016 Wrong-Footed for Economic Recovery


How far will Russia’s GDP fall by the end of this year? What happens in the fourth quarter of 2015 will be a critical early indicator of what to expect in 2016.
 The fall in GDP has been steep in 2015. GDP fell sharply in the first quarter by -2.2% year-on-year, then dropped sharply again in the second Quarter to -4.6%. It then stabilized in the third Quarter at a slightly improved -4.1%, encouraging some commentators, including President Vladimir Putin, to declare that the economy had bottomed out.
 The Russian economy could, indeed, stabilize on the assumption that the impacts of lower oil prices and economic sanctions have run their course. But is that the case and can Russia, as its Finance Minister Anton Siluanov believes, return to positive growth in 2016?
 The IMF now expects a decline in Russian GDP in 2015 of -3.8%.(http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/pr/2015/pr15533.htm), a number that agrees with the World Bank number in September. Since the declines in GDP for the first, second and third quarters of 2015 are known, it is simple math to calculate that the IMF and World Bank expect a decline of -4.4% in the fourth quarter, somewhat worse than in the third quarter. If the IMF and World Bank are correct, the fourth quarter of 2015 will not signal a bottoming out or a turnaround in the economy as yet.
 Nevertheless, the IMF and the World Bank project Russian GDP to decline by only -0.6% in 2016, a substantial improvement over 2015 and, by implication, a possible very modest return to growth during the year. However, given the current rate of decline, the upturn in 2016 will have to be dramatic to average out to -0.6% for the year.
 What changes between December 2015 and January 2016 to change Russia’s growth prospects? The answer is, nothing.
 The IMF appears to expect a turnaround in 2016 based on a modest recovery in the price of oil and an increase in non-energy manufacturing exports due to increased competitiveness from a cheaper ruble. This will improve Russia’s current account even if gross domestic investment and consumption are essentially unchanged from 2015(http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2015/cr15211.pdf).
 But there are reasons to doubt such a scenario. Crucially, the IMF numbers are based on an average oil price of US$61.50/barrel in 2015 and US$67.20/barrel in 2016. However, the average price of oil in 2015 has been trending substantially below the IMF’s figure, around US$54/barrel(http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/steo/). Prospects for an oil price recovery in 2016 look equally dim since the most recent trend in price has been steadily downward. In addition, the increase in manufacturing has yet to materialize(Russian manufacturing: no lift-off http://on.ft.com/1NEHTeE via fastFT). At the same time, investment and consumption are showing no signs of life. Consumption, in particular, will continue to fall as public sector spending falls (including public sector wages and pensions, which make up a large share of national income) and the poverty rate rises.
 Russia enters 2016 wrong-footed for recovery. The projected steep fall in fourth quarter 2015 GDP suggests that the decline will continue into the first part of 2016 since most economic drivers are still trending downward. The decline in the first half of 2016 could be as much as 4-5%, similar to its performance in the second half of 2015.
 That means that growth in the second half of 2016 would have to be 1-2% to attain the IMF and World Bank projection for the year. A turnaround of that magnitude in such a short time is highly unlikely without a turnaround in investment and consumption. More likely is a continued decline or, finally, a bottoming out in the middle of the year as the economy finds a new equilibrium with lower investment, lower consumption and lower growth, followed by near zero growth for the rest of the year. This suggests that GDP in 2016 is likely to fall by at least 1-2% if Russia can stabilize the economy by mid-year. A return to a very tepid positive growth in the second half of the year is still possible, but may not occur until 2017.
 It is also possible that Russia may surprise even more on the downside due to its unique circumstances, including an astonishing level of corruption and bureaucratic interference that will prevent the economy from stabilizing at a new equilibrium point based on pure economic factors. Also, the burden of heavy military spending and capital flight may limit growth well below the economy’s potential. With such fragility built into the economy, the catalyst for a downside surprise may be further erosion in the price of oil (and gas) that triggers a collapse in economic activity. The OPEC meeting this week appears to have kicked the bottom out of oil price, which is close to its six-year lows and falling.
 There is also a high risk that worse than expected economic performance in 2016 may result in poor policy choices.  Russia may be sorely tempted to print money to cover the shortfall in public sector expenditures as its Reserve Fund is depleted next year, or in a vain attempt to stimulate consumption, putting its inflation target at risk, rather than suffer a further fall in GDP and steadily increasing poverty.  The Russian people will see their suffering increase…unless…unless Putin is tempted to initiate another provocation to deflect attention from Russia’s worsening economic condition. Then, the risk of economic discontinuity will be immeasurably increased.
DirkMattheisen.blogspot.com

Tuesday, December 1, 2015

Another Russia

By any measure of economic performance Russia is failing.  The economy--not its foreign adventures in Ukraine, Syria or elsewhere--will determine whether Russia’s future is secure.  Russia needs to transform itself into another Russia.

Future economic growth is projected to be small under a new Russian normal, due to deeply rooted structural problems in the economy, a sharp fall in capital investment and the absence of foreign direct investment.  The IMF now projects a decline in GDP of 3.8 percent in 2015 and a further decline of 0.6 percent in 2016, with growth afterwards of only 1.5 percent per annum into the foreseeable future.  The IMF’s 2015 Article IV report on Russia sums up the economic challenge,

“…staff’s medium-term projection is based on persistently low oil prices, suggesting a muted recovery.  Coupled with the lingering effects of sanctions, negative population dynamics and slowing productivity due to the lack of structural reforms, this is expected to result in weak potential growth in the medium term (around 1.5 percent).”

However, this may be optimistic.  Growth was only 1.3 percent in 2013 and falling before the current economic difficulties, which suggests even lower future growth without major reforms.
The World Bank’s 2015 Russia Economic Report paints a more pessimistic short-term picture than the IMF, with similar future prospects,
A combination of persistently low global oil prices and ongoing international sanctions is exerting a profoundly negative influence on Russia’s growth prospects. The World Bank’s baseline growth outlook for 2015 anticipates that the Russian economy will contract by 3.8 percent in 2015, with real GDP slipping below its 2012 levels.” http://www.wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2015/04/12/090224b082df919...

The World Bank also projects that Russia’s GDP will contract a further 0.6 percent in 2016, with medium-term growth of around 1.5 percent if internal and external economic conditions improve.  Again, an optimistic scenario given the Russian economy’s performance prior to the current economic difficulties.

The Bank of Russia is even more pessimistic.  It projects a fall in GDP of up to 4.4 percent in 2015 and a fall of up to 1.0 percent in 2016, before a return to growth (no figure given)—a substantial deterioration from its earlier projections.

What is worrisome about the IMF-World Bank-Bank of Russia projections is that their projections have been revised steadily downwards and project increasingly dire prospects in the short-term before a return to low growth that is now unlikely before at least 2017.

Russia needs both internal reform and improved economic relations with other countries to lift economic growth, no matter what happens to oil prices.

The picture is not entirely dire.  Russia has economic and financial institutions that have acted credibly.  The Bank of Russia responded vigorously to the near collapse of the ruble in 2014 and did the right thing by freeing the exchange rate and raising interest rates.  In its recent pronouncements, the Russian budget office appears to understand that extraordinary budgetary and economic policy measures are required to restructure the economy and promote growth.  In fact, the relative independence of the Bank of Russia in financial policy should be a model for economic policy, as well.  The Kremlin cannot centralize economic management in its own hands and achieve growth through dirigiste measures.

The IMF and World Bank reports include numerous suggestions to improve economic performance.  Most important though is a reform agenda that is at the center of government and is acted on.   Growth will continue to decline if broad-based reform is not undertaken.

To improve its growth prospects, Russia needs progress in four areas of economic reform.

First, Russia needs to dramatically improve capital and labor productivity by reducing corruption and instilling the rule of law in business and economic policy so that capital and labor can be allocated efficiently according to market pricing.  It cannot be overemphasized that the provision of additional capital alone, without a change in the business and economic environment, will not sustain Russian growth.
The IMF points to internal reforms in governance and in labor and capital markets as key to lifting Russia’s long-term growth, including curtailing government involvement in the economy and reviving the Russian privatization program.  The national and regional budgets need to be restructured, as well, to direct resources toward productive economic activities; in particular, military spending needs to be cut and savings redirected toward social spending, especially health and education for the young, upon which greater labor productivity will depend.

While Russia needs to own its own political agenda, confidence in the rule of law will not happen until Russia halts internal and international political provocations that are perceived as heightening political risk.  Among the necessary measures is resolution of culpability for the downing of Malaysia Flight MH17.  It is wishful thinking to believe that the deaths of nearly 300 European and Asian citizens will be simply forgotten or forgiven without an accounting for who is responsbile.  It is also necessary to roll back much recent legislation that restricts or distorts Russia’s capital and labor markets, including not only economic restrictions but also restrictions on the media and internet that inhibit the exchange of information about economic conditions that are necessary to make informed business and economic policy decisions at the level of the individual and the firm. 

Freeing the economic potential of Russia will probably also require empowering the Russian regions by giving every region a voice in Moscow.  Economic fiat directed outward and downward from Moscow will not provide enough flexibility to capture local economic opportunities.  Equally unhelpful is the capture of economic gains by Moscow through taxation and administrative measures that starve regional economies of investment, especially investment in small- and medium-sized business enterprises.

Second, Russia needs to embrace Europe, not confront it.  Europe was the largest source of foreign capital for Russia, the most advanced source of technology needed to improve Russian economic performance and Russia’s largest trading partner.  Russia also needs Europe as an economic partner to gain from trade between Europe and Asia, especially with China.

Given the state of relations, Russia needs to take pragmatic first steps in economic cooperation through existing institutions where Russia already has a presence but is not dominant enough to dictate the terms of cooperation.  The Eurasian Union does not have the structure or the reach.  Russia can build economic resilience through, for instance, its membership in the WTO.  Russia became a member in 2012, but has not yet realized the potential for increasing Russian trade (for instance, in agriculture), in part due to Russia’s obsessive focus on primary resource exports.  While the current government has focused on import substitution to bolster domestic production, it will mean little for growth if Russian domestic industry cannot increase exports of globally competitive products.

Third, Russia needs to improve investment and trade relations with the Central Asian economies and with China to capture the economic potential in transportation and communication between Asia and Europe.  Right now Russia is losing out.  Why?  Because China is investing considerably more than Russia in the infrastructure for a new Silk Road linking Asian and European markets, and that Chinese investment is not flowing into Russia.  Rather, Chinese investment is flowing into the Central Asian countries, which are capturing an increasing share of the growth opportunities (http://on.ft.com/1NHBGOt).  Despite the heavily promoted pipeline deals between Russia and China, actual investment by China is outpacing actual investment by Russia by a wide margin.  Russia needs to increase infrastructure investment that supports inter-country trade through routes and services that are anchored in the Russian economy, such as Russian port, rail and road services. 

Strengthening participation in global and regional economic institutions will allow Russia to rebuild and extend its economic influence without overt political friction, which over time will build confidence in its intent to engage constructively with its neighbors and the rest of the world.  This will eventually allow political bridges to be built.  While it is beyond the scope of this article to discuss political and military associations with neighbors, viewing those associations in terms of economic priorities will advance Russia’s economic prospects.

Fourth, improving Russian economic prospects means solving Russia’s demographic problem.  Russian’s population is expected to decrease from about 144m today to as little as 116m by 2050 (http://www.wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2015/04/12/090224b082df919...).  Although Putin views the multi-ethnic character of Russia as a threat to state cohesion, Russia needs to attract in-migration from the Russian periphery—especially the Russian diaspora but other sources as well--on a greater scale to reverse its population decline.  Otherwise, Russia’s labor force and domestic market will continue to shrink.  Without a more attractive social environment, including better economic opportunities and tolerance for minority rights, Russia faces a Russian world—spread out across ten or so neighboring countries—that is increasingly skeptical of its social and economic benefits; such as the people of Ukraine who constituted up to 20% of the Soviet Union’s population but, in view of Russian conduct, are now unlikely to chose to freely associate with or be a part of Russia’s economic sphere.  Russians in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are not clamoring to reenter Russia because their economic welfare--and personal security--is better than it would be in Russia. 
Russia as a magnet for immigration could solve its biggest economic problem, a declining--and aging--population that is undercutting economic growth.  In fact, the World Bank report on Russia suggests that changes in labor productivity and labor-market policies could have a greater positive impact on GDP growth than oil prices. http://www.wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2015/04/12/090224b082df919...
Imagine another Russia.  One that has embraced internal reform and repaired its economic relations with the outside world.  A realistic, alternative Russia that is possible because Russia is not ordained to follow its current path of confrontation and decline.  It is possible for its leadership and people to choose alternative paths with better outcomes.

A Russia that looks--if you will--like a vast Sweden or Switzerland.  Sweden--once considered a modern economic hinterland itself--diversified its economy from basic processing (iron ore and forestry) into a global leader in advanced manufacturing and services.  Russia, like Sweden, has a peripheral position to the European economy, not to mention a challenging climate; but, like Sweden, Russia is situated in close proximity to major European markets on which to build demand for more advanced Russian products and services.  Switzerland is geographically isolated but centrally located to take advantage of major European markets and undertook an economic transformation similar to Sweden’s (even while it is not a member of the European Union).  Russia, in the manner of Switzerland, is strategically located to take advantage of key Europe-Asia transportation and communication land and air routes (also without being a member of the EU).  Even the Swiss free association political model looks tempting, since only free association will hold Russia together. 

Imagine again another Russia that looks--if you will--like a France or Britain, with global soft power and powerful cultural exports, as well as a secure, diverse economic base.  A Russia that markets its cultural riches rather than closes its doors behind them.

Rather than chase the chimera of empire, Russia needs vision and inspiration to place itself in a new economic context based on economic competitiveness--not unlike what other countries have already done (Sweden once sought empire also).

With the right vision, Russia transforms from a frustrated, insecure Eurasian core state (that is, frankly, over concerned with security matters) to a nexus state based on advanced processing and engineering of its primary resources and on transport and communication between Asia and Europe, the world’s two largest economic poles.


At the moment Russia lacks the necessary linkages.  The government is not committed to economic or social reform or adapting to new circumstances, and reformers outside the government are marginalized.  Without enlightened leadership and an active, independent civil society, Russia doesn’t have the levers to change course and realize its economic potential.