Skip to main content

A short note on Asian Financial Crisis 1997-98

 The miraculous rise of Japanese economy in 1970-80s inspired many Asian countries to adopt state driven growth model. East and Southeast Asian countries mirrored the Japanese economies policies and registered an impressive growth during 1980s. These countries were nicknamed “Asian Tigers”. However, the growth bubble burst in July 1997 in Asia and soon it became a global crisis.

Asian Tigers’ economic growth were based upon the two important pillars provided by people and government, respectively. Asian countries faced low inflation and high employment rates as people were willing to work long hours at lower wages. And governments worked as catalyst providing capital and tax benefits to domestic industries. They selected industries which could successfully compete with foreign firms. Banks provided credit to businesses as per the government policies.

Banks’s Overseas Borrowings: Lower Interest Rates in the US

The US interest rates were much lower than Asian rates. Thus, Asian banks found it cheaper to borrow in dollars from US than domestic sources. These banks then investments much of their borrowings into high-risk bond markets. Banks gambled on the expectation that local currencies wouldn’t devalue against dollars. But by this way, they were exposed to foreign financial markets. On the other hand, higher interest rates in Asian countries attracted foreign capital which kept the Asian stock exchanges to northward direction. Many of these investors also bought real estate as collateral in exchange of providing loans.

The Asian Bubble Bursts in 1997

In the month of July (1997), Thailand first shown some signs of weakness in the economy. Speculators started to sell their Thai currency holdings in volumes, as they expected that its value would decline. Once the currency sell off started, investors started to dump local currencies in exchange for American dollars. Soon the panic spread to other Asian countries, and foreign investors sold off their holdings. Before it was over, many Asian stock markets collapsed, businesses filed for bankruptcy and unemployment soared. For instance, Hong Kong stock market plummeted by 40% in 197-98.

South Korea tried to curb the capital flight by paying foreign debts in dollars. But this caused further appreciation of dollars and devaluation of local currencies. The panic didn’t stop at Asian borders, it spread to Latin American countries. Foreign investors started to sell off in Brazil, Argentina and Mexico. They started to see all emerging economies from the same narrow lenses.

Factors Responsible for Crisis

  • The most important factors was integrated global financial markets.

  • Second, economic interdependence among trading partners. Thus, devaluation of one currency diminished the importing capabilities from other trading partners. So the trade volume was significantly reduced.

  • Third, internet, enables financial transactions in seconds. It reduces the government’s ability to respond quickly. Even a small rumor can be spread quickly through ICT technologies and negative sentiments can run through the market.

  • Fourth, the investors started to see all emerging markets through the same lenses. They thought problem in one meant problem in all emerging economies.

  • Lastly, the local banks were unsupervised. And often loans were made with political considerations and hid the information from public.

Asian economic crisis showed that when financial instability strikes to one country, it can spread to other countries like an outward ripples in a pond.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is Mercantilist Theory of International Political Economy?

  Mercantilists slogan was "export more, import less." During the 16th and 17th centuries, states were the main players of global economies and they encouraged exports over imports to finance their huge armies. Similar to realists, mercantilists argued that economic policies should advance state power.  They believed accumulation of metals (gold and silver) was more important than trade as it increased the national wealth. So national economies that time were measured on how much gold one country had not how much trade they had. Spain's conquest of Latin American countries: Panama, West Indies, Venezuela and Peru, provided abundance of gold mines and Spaniards became extensively rich. Spain also put restriction on the colonial trades. colonies couldn't trade with other countries. Mercantilism thrived in Europe from the exploitation of colonies. Soon other European countries joined the loot of colonies in Africa, Asia and elsewhere.  Mercantilists as with realists arg...
Post a Comment
Read more

A short note on US Sub-Prime Lending Crisis 2007-8

 The “Great Recession” in 2008 showed the weaknesses in Western economic models. The crisis highlighted the differences in political and economic paths adopted by Western and Asian countries. It all started in late 1990s, when American real estate prices were soaring and banks provided mortgages to anyone without income guarantee until 2007 when the real estate prices fell and borrowers defaulted on their repayments. But before we analyze the crisis, it’s necessary to understand the western economic liberal policies which led to it. After decades of government intervention, the US President Ronald Reagan and the UK PM Margret Thatcher started to “roll back the state” from national economies. They demanded a return to Adam Smith’s liberal policies which were encourage individual realization and reducing the social welfare spending. The renewed belief in ‘market’ and ‘invisible hand’ led them to believe that market itself would provide welfare for all. Western Liberal Economy Lib...
Post a Comment
Read more

What is US Indo -Pacific Strategy?

  The US President Donald Trump release a document named "Free and Open Indo-Pacific" (FOIP) in 2017 at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit. The Trump administration sees "Indo-Pacific Region" as a central foreign and economic policy for dealing with China. However, there are still fewer countries who have adopted the term "Indo-Pacific", they still term the region as "Asia-Pacific". Why the US is focused on Indo-Pacific region? Is it to counter China or something else is going on? The US partners such as Japan and South Korea have been cautious in their approach. So why does the US changed the name from Asia to Indo-Pacific? The term Indo-Pacific has enjoyed growing popularity in Japan, the US, Australia, India and France. It has become a kind of geopolitical nomenclature, which has nothing to do with term itself, rather it perceives as a US strategy to counter China in the Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean. The ever-expanding Chine...
Post a Comment
Read more