Economy
In reply to the discussion: Weekend Economists Go Eat Worms March 27-29, 2015 [View all]Demeter
(85,373 posts)editor-in-chief of The Automatic Earth. Originally published at Automatic Earth
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/03/ilargi-kiev-moscow-bonds-haircuts.html
When money managers talk outside their narrow field, nonsense is guaranteed to ensue. No better example than this Bloomberg piece on Ukraines debt restructuring plans, which are as much a political tool as they are anything else at all. Ukraines American Finance Minister has announced a broad restructuring plan with a wide range of severe haircuts for creditors, and she well, obviously wishes to include Russia in the group of creditors who are about to get their heads shaved. And despite all obvious angles to the issue that are not purely economical, Bloomberg presents a whole array of finance professionals who are free to spout their entirely irrelevant opinions on the topic. If you didnt know any better, youd be inclined to think that perhaps Russia is indeed just another creditor to Kiev.
As Ukraine begins bond-restructuring talks, it finds itself face-to-face with a familiar foe: Russia. President Vladimir Putin bought $3 billion of Ukrainian bonds in late 2013. The cash was meant to support an ally, then-President Yanukovych.
That is, for starters, a far too narrow way of putting it. Russia simply wanted to make sure Ukraine would remain a stable nation, both politically and economically, because A) it didnt want a failed state on its borders and B) it wanted to ensure a smooth transfer of its gas sales to Europe through the Ukraine pipeline systems. Whether that would be achieved through Yanukovych or someone else was a secondary issue. Putin was never a big fan of the former president, but at least he kept the gas flowing.
Heres the biggest issue here, one which Bloomberg conveniently omits. Not only was Russia left with the securities after the Maidan coup (or revolution if you must), but the money provided through them to Ukraine began to be used to organize and fund various battalions and other groups, thrown together into a Kiev army, that started aiming for and at the Russian speaking population in East Ukraine. 6000 of them did not survive this. The same would have happened in Crimea (Moscow is convinced of this) had not Putin made it part of Russia before that could happen. Do note that one of the very first decrees issued by US installed PM Yatsenyuk and his cabinet was one that banned Russian to be used as an official language by millions of people who speak only Russian. That Yats withdrew the decree within a week didnt matter anymore, the game was on right then and there.
Russian Deputy Finance Minister Sergey Storchak said March 17 that the nation isnt taking part in the debt negotiations because its an official creditor, not a private bondholder. If the Kremlin maintains this view, it would be negative for private bondholders as other investors will be more tempted to hold out as well, according to Marco Ruijer at ING. He predicts a 45% chance of a hold out, while Michael Ganske at Rogge in London says its 70%.
Heres where we get into la-la land, with money managers speaking out on things they dont know anything about. Which can then be used to lead up to a goal-seeked conclusion, as we will see. Because of the situation I painted above, Russia cannot and will not take part in the debt negotiations the west tries to shove down its throat through Jareskos restructuring plans. If only because as soon as the restructuring has given Kiev some financial breathing space, is will use it to reinforce its troops and go after its Russian speaking compatriots again. Its a not a finance issue at all, its life and death, and that makes percentages thrown around by money guys behind desks in high rises not just futile, but positively inane.
Holding out can lead to two outcomes: Russia gets paid back in full after the notes mature in December, or Ukraine defaults. The former option is politically unacceptable in Kiev, according to Tim Ash at Standard Bank, while the latter would likely start litigation and delay the borrowers return to foreign capital markets, which Jaresko expects in 2017. Russia will be holdouts, to try and force a messy restructuring, Ash said by e-mail on March 19.
No, Russia is not interested in a messy restructuring. It will simply refuse to throw Kievs aggression against its own people a lifeline, and it will insist on finding that appropriate forum, instead of the one Jaresko tries to force it into. Russia will demand to be paid in full, and if that means a Ukraine default, it is fine with that. Dont forget that the $3 billion in bonds is by no means the only debt Ukraine owes Moscow. There are many billions in unpaid gas purchases, and undoubtedly many other bills.
Nice theory. Why dont we have Greece use it too? Russia would obviously never accept this. At the very minimum, gas would stop flowing through Ukraine to Europe.
These guys really have no idea whats going on. They see the planet exclusively in dollar terms. And they have no idea why they said 10%, might as well have been 5% or 25%. Hot air.
Sounds like things in the real world are already much worse than in BoA notes.
No kidding, Liza.
And there we get to the core of the matter. If Jaresko wants to force anything on Russia, shell have to move outside of the law. Which Im sure she, and the US cabal that rules Kiev, would be more than willing to do, but it would mean a default no matter what happens, simply because time is of the essence, and the issue would drag on for a long time.
MORE, AND GREAT COMMENTARY AT LINK