“We
are Going to Collapse your Banks”: Greek Government Insider Lifts
the Lid on Five Months of Financial Blackmail
'We
Underestimated Their Power'
8
July, 2015
In
this interview with Mediapart, a senior advisor to the Greek
government, who has been at the heart of the past five months of
negotiations between Athens and its international creditors, reveals
the details of what resembles a game of liar’s dice over the fate
of a nation that has been brought to its economic and social knees.
His account gives a rare and disturbing insight into the process
which has led up to this week’s make-or-break deadline for reaching
a bailout deal between Greece and international lenders, without
which the country faces crashing out of the euro and complete
bankruptcy. He describes the extraordinary bullying of Greece’s
radical-left government by the creditors, including Eurogroup
president Jeroen Dijsselbloem’s direct threat to cause the collapse
of the Hellenic banks if it failed to sign-up to a drastic austerity
programme. “We went into a war thinking we had the same weapons as
them”, he says. “We underestimated their power”.
A
senior member of Greece’s negotiating team with its European
creditors agreed to a meeting last week in Athens with Mediapart
special correspondent Christian Salmon. Speaking on condition that
his name is withheld, he detailed the history of the protracted and
bitter negotiations between the radical-left Syriza government,
elected in January, and international lenders for the provision of a
new bailout for the debt-ridden country.
The
almost two-hour interview in English took place just days before last
Sunday’s referendum on the latest drastic austerity-driven bailout
terms offered by the creditors, and opposed by Prime Minister Alexis
Tsipras, and which were finally rejected by 61.3% of Greek voters.
While
the ministerial advisor slams the stance of the international
creditors, who he accuses of leading a strategy of deliberate
suffocation of Greece’s finances and economy, he is also critical
of some of the decisions taken by Athens. His account also throws
light on the personal tensions surrounding the talks led by former
Greek finance minister Yanis Varoufakis, who resigned from his post
on Monday deploring “a
certain preference by some Eurogroup participants, and assorted
‘partners’, for my ‘absence’ from its meetings”.
The
advisor cites
threats proffered to Varoufakis by Eurogroup president Jeroen
Dijsselbloem,
warning he would sink Greece’s banks unless the Tsipras government
bowed to the harsh deal on offer, and by German finance minister
Wolfgang Schäuble, who he says demanded: “How much money do you
want to leave the euro?”
The
interview follows below and over the following three pages presented
in a continuous series of extracts (editor’s notes appear in
italics within hard brackets):
From
early on I disagreed that it was only a negotiation – we give this,
you give that, you come closer. Because what happened was they had
some negotiations, some details about fiscal policy, about
conditions, et cetera. So, through these discussions it was the
government that was coming, coming – coming close to the Troika,
without them making any move towards us, and never discussing the
debt: debt restructuring, debt sustainability, and also, you know,
financing. We are going to get some new financing, is the ECB
[editor's
note: European Central Bank]
going to lift all these caps, all these restrictions, these limits on
how much the banks can borrow, the state can borrow from the banks?
Because we can’t borrow.
We
used to. Up until February, we could still issue treasury bills.
Short-term, three-month fixed bonds, mostly one-year. But this
government was never allowed to do that because it was finished. No
more treasury bills […] You
see, the problem with treasury bills, [is
that]
it is the Greek banks who buy it. And the ECB said: “No more
treasury bills”. So the state could not borrow from the banks.
So,
from March, April onwards, we started economizing from the state,
pulling together all the cash reserves from different branches,
agencies, local authorities, things like that, in order to manage to
pay the IMF [International
Monetary Fund].
We paid once, we paid twice, and [we
had]
to pay wages as well. We paid wages from earnings, from tax receipts.
But it’s not enough to pay the IMF. We have a problem with the
primary surplus, we couldn’t pay the IMF, so we had to scrape
around.
So
basically this has created a domestic shortage of liquidity,
liquidity in cash. Banks, export companies, good companies, could not
borrow, people could not pay back their debts, they couldn’t get
any extensions to their credits and basically the credit system
started to disintegrate, to not function. Of
course, the banks themselves had some security reserves, but when
they reached the point they said the banks can’t even borrow even
from the ELA [Emergency
Liquidity Assistance fund]
at all, they had to shut down, because they would deplete their
reserves.
[...]
Companies who do not pay their employees through bank accounts cannot
pay cash to the employees – and there are many. Also they say
“look, we don’t have any revenues so I give you 500 euros instead
of 800 euros and we’ll see what happens after the banks reopen”. So
we have a situation which is escalating into a chain reaction […]
like having a heart attack. A heart attack if you view
cash liquidity as the blood of the economy. On the weekend when the
ECB stopped, we had the heart attack. Now we are having its after
effects. Different organs are getting numb. Some stop working, others
are trying but they don’t have enough blood.
On
former finance minister Yanis Varoufakis:
Unable
to see eye-to-eye: Eurogroup president Jeroen Dijsselbloem (left) and
Yanis Varoufakis meeting in Athens in February. © Reuters.
People
are asking why he is supposed to be so unpopular with the Eurogroup
and the people in power, why they don’t like him. And a lot of
people say they don’t like him because he appears to be lecturing
them, because of being arrogant. He thinks this is an academic issue,
an economic issue or a technical issue. But what I think is that all
these people – especially people in politics, in power, the
Eurogroup, fellow ministers – they have seen a phenomenon that is
much more different than anything they have encountered in their
circle, from those elected, in the normal process of politics.
Because
you have a man that has his own style of dressing, he is very
self-confident, at the same time he is very friendly, very open, very
honest. You
know, you ask him a question and he doesn’t spin around, he doesn’t
change the subject, and so this creates difficulty, both to the
politician and the journalist, [to]
the media. These are two things that show that Varoufakis doesn’t
fit, but on the other hand he is a celebrity and he creates clashing
emotions. You hate him or you love him.
On
the grave immediate crisis facing the Greek banks:
The
reserves were not to the amount. We are in a situation where normally
the liquidity in the market, the money that circulates in the market,
is around 10 billion euros, but now with all that is happening,
[with]
people keeping money under the mattress, it is around 50 billion. 50
billion euros of cash circulate, and the ECB has stopped [its
emergency funding of Greek banks].
So this means that people who have bank accounts, say [with]
2-3-4-5 thousand [euros],
they can only get 60 euros per day, and if you have more accounts,
OK, you can get more per day.
But what about the people who have no
account, who expect to live off their salary? At the end of every
month they are broke until the paycheck comes […] From yesterday
they were only giving 50 euros. Only smaller banks, like post office
banks, which have fewer customers, can still give 60 euros. But the
big four [banks]
– National, Piraeus, Alpha and Eurobank – have run out of [notes
of]
20s, so they can only give 50. So from 60 euros it has fallen to 50.
A
security guard delivers cash to a bank in Athens, June 28th. ©
Reuters.
But
the security reserves which they have kept, they run out of it. If
all the people go and get 60 euros – even if they don’t need it,
but just to save something – there will come a time they [the
banks]
will have no cash [left]. And
that’s where the problem starts. And in that case, if we don’t
have an emergency liquidity supply from the ECB, we have no option
but to start issuing some kind of [parallel]
money. Of course, that would be the end of the economy because
already there is fear, there is panic, that even if the banks open
again, they will still need to be re-capitalised. Up to now, they
have been solvent.
They
were borrowing from the ELA, they should have been able to borrow
from the ECB as well, but the ECB said “No, from now on we don’t
accept your collateral. You have to borrow more expensively from the
ELA”. That’s another of those caps limits the banks have. But if
they run out of reserves, the state paid about 40 billion to
replenish the capital which the banks lost after the [2012]
haircut of the old Greek bonds.
The
part of the second programme
of the agreement of 2012,
after the
haircut of the PSI [Private
Sector Involvement],
which was about 170 billion euros, 50 billion out of that was for the
recapitalisation of the banks. Of
course, there was another problem. From the PSI, the public funds
suffered losses almost, if not more, in their own reserves. Why?
Because they were forced under the law to save their cash reserves
with the Bank of Greece, and the Bank of Greece had the right to use
these funds to buy bonds on their behalf.
For
me it was a big scandal because apparently what happened was a lot of
politicians, bankers, a lot of people went and gave – they had
bonds that they had bought 20% – they went and they gave it to the
Greek Central Bank, Bank of Greece, 100%, they got their money and
then the haircut comes to the public.
Basically,
what they were forced to do was to use their cash reserves, social
security funds, pension funds, in order to buy government bonds that
were going to be cut in real terms around 70% in present value. So
the funds right now, the pension funds, are facing a bigger problem
than the banks are facing. The pension funds have to plan 15 to 20
years ahead to be able to pay pensions, when the aging population is
increasing and the working population is decreasing.
They also have to pay unemployment benefits and so on. So, all these debt locks came to the front now.
They also have to pay unemployment benefits and so on. So, all these debt locks came to the front now.
[…]
Already from the end of February and certainly by the middle of March
it was obvious that the creditors were not going to honour the
February 20th agreement, which says that Greece proposes reforms, the
Troika – “the Institutions”, as it is now called – evaluates
and agrees and the reforms go on. Nothing like that happened. The
institutions were continuously rejecting reforms without looking.
“No, they are too generous” and Varoufakis was telling them:
“Please, let us complete four to five reforms on which we all agree
and view as necessary and let us implement them and you can evaluate
and make an assessment of them”.
[The
Institutions said]
“No, no, we need a comprehensive agreement before we implement
these reforms, because if you implement these reforms that would be a
unilateral action. We haven’t approved them yet, ok, we agree, but
we still haven’t determined the primary surplus”. So we are
unable to do anything while at the same time they wanted to see our
books because they didn’t trust our numbers. “We want to go to
the Ministry of Finance, the Bank of Greece” et cetera, and
Varoufakis was saying: “No, let’s start from the agreement of
February 20th under which you are not supervising the Greek economy
anymore and you are not assisting us or the creditors to assess the
viability of the economy so as to gradually return to growth. That’s
the objective of the February 20th agreement, an extension of the
existing programme. We amend, evaluate and complete the programme in
four months. June 30th, programme finished”.
But
they pulled the plug on the banks and on Tuesday June 30th the
programme finished, so we are not in a programme.
All
the money they owe us… about 17 billion euros, [of
which]
10 billion [is]
from the remainder of the 50-billion-euro [Hellenic] Financial
Stability Fund which,
under the February 20th agreement, we would have to give back. We
have not received any money from June last year, so for 12 months we
have been paying around 10 billion euros to the creditors from our
resources without getting a single euro from them, which they had
agreed to give, of course under conditions. It was obvious they were
not going to cooperate and that we needed growth and these were two
problems going side by side. They didn’t want to finance the money
we were entitled to in order to pay the debts.
On
the ‘maze of pseudo-negotiations’, and the ‘character
assassination’ of Varoufakis:
All
the loans we have received, 240 to 250 billion euros, go for the
servicing of the debt, back to the creditors. The first bailout was a
bailout of the banks to the state. We didn’t get any finance in
order to pay them, we couldn’t borrow short-term and we couldn’t
facilitate the liquidity of the economy because the ECB was putting
one restriction after the other. So you have the liquidity problem
and at the same time you have a financing problem. The two of them
are connected in what I called from the beginning ‘credit
asphyxiation’.
In
the middle of March, finally, some Brussels sources said to the
correspondents in Brussels that “yes, the institutions – the EBD,
IMF, European Commission, are using credit asphyxiation in order to
force the government to comply, accept the reforms, do it quickly, et
cetera.”. For me it was an admission that they were using the worst
king of economic blackmail to the country. The worst kind of economic
sanctions. If we [take]
Iraq, and instead of doing a trade embargo they said “we cut all
your assets, your banks have no money, no dollars, no anything, you
have to rely on printing money, you’re going to have an exposure”.
But they didn’t do that in Iraq. It was a trade embargo, not a
financial or credit asphyxiation.
Because at any moment, gradually, there comes a time you die. You can’t survive this much longer. Varoufakis has even called it “waterboarding”, financial and fiscal waterboarding.
Because at any moment, gradually, there comes a time you die. You can’t survive this much longer. Varoufakis has even called it “waterboarding”, financial and fiscal waterboarding.
The
assumption is that by pulling the plug, they pull the plug of the
whole world. This has not happened and I am sorry. I was following
how the euro was going, how it was reacting, because they did
experiments. [German
finance minister Wolfgang]
Schäuble and Berlin are clever, they enforce artificial crises into
the negotiations now and then: “Oh, the Greeks are not cooperating,
they haven’t understood what to do, they are not giving any
figures”. And instead of falling, the euro is going up. The same
with European stock exchange.
[…]
Only in the last week they [the
Greek government]
realised it, and Varoufakis made a couple of statements, that
we go to the European Court of Justice.
When you reach the explosion of the crisis, legal arguments are not
valid anymore, they can’t help.
I
said let Tsipras go to the European Parliament and say that this is
how we were treated the last months. Also, refuse to implement these
harsh measures. They [the
Greek government]
prefer to lose the elections [rather
than]
to enforce those measures. But every time they try political
negotiation they [have
been]
fooled by them [the
creditors]:
twenty times with Merkel and five more with Schäuble. And how many
Eurogroup [meetings]
where they said “go back to the technical teams, go back to the
Troika”. The [Greek
government]
said “no, we want a political decision” [but
they were told]
“Our political decision is to go back to the technical decision,
you can’t have a political decision without a technical decision”.
A
Syriza party poster during the July 5th referendum campaign urging a
“No” vote “for democracy and dignity”. © Amélie Poinssot
[…]
At every point they were trying to undermine the prestige that the
Greek [Syriza]
government had won during the first months of negotiation. At the
time people said “a new hope for Europe… a new hope for Germany,
Spain… the Greeks are giving us the lead”. If [the
Institutions]
said from the beginning “It’s finished, we don’t agree, no more
negotiations” – which they said indirectly, for example [Dutch
finance minister andEurogroup president Jeroen]
Dijsselbloem – then it’d be clear and we would be in a clash: “We
are elected, have prestige and authority. You are wrong etc”. But
they didn’t do that […] They created a maze of
pseudo-negotiations, time wasted, and it was on their side. All the
time they were carrying negative propaganda against Varoufakis.
Character assassination, and Varoufakis keeps saying that. But what
did he expect?
So
here we are, having lost all the economic ground of negotiating in
real terms, of finding a new agreement, and also lost the credibility
to force them to negotiate with us. The government, Tsipras,
says that when they presented us the ultimatum “take it or leave
it” [it
was]
with worst measures than they had presented to the previous
government, the right-wing government […] the ECB tells the
parliament “You take the measures or on Monday you have no
banks”. But
our banks were alright. So instead what [the
Greek government]
did, and it was correct as a move, they went for the referendum,
which means that they would have to do what they did in Cyprus for a
week. They believed the situation would bring them closer to a deal.
They didn’t want a crisis.
But
they don’t have enough of a global or a European crisis, or a
collapse. Yes the stock exchanges fall, yes there are fluctuations,
the pound is rising. But, in the end, the Europeans are not forced to
come loser.
[…]
Varoufakis and Tsipras say that in case of a “No” [vote
in the July 5th referendum],
our bargaining position is strengthened. That’s
why they say “No”, and not to an agreement that is not on the
table anymore. “No” to any kind of agreement that doesn’t deal
with the debt restructuring or fiscal adjustment. The amount that is
left for [the
European institutions)
to pay, 17 billion euros - plus another 16 or 20 billion from the IMF
- are lost. The programme is finished and you need a new agreement.
Basically what you do is beg the Europeans for an emergency funding
through the ECB. But they say that to do that they have to go back to
parliaments et cetera. But you need recapitalization in order to
re-enter a process of economic functioning that would allow for
dealing with a new programme.
Behind
the scenes with 'king' Schäuble, and when Dijsselbloem
threatened to sink the Greek banks:
Of
course, even to discuss Grexit is illegal since there is no legal
provision in the Treaties to do that. […] There
is no safeguard that a Grexit can happen in an orderly, negotiated,
peaceful manner instead of disorderly, with people running to the
foodstores. If you don’t have a process of exit from
the euro, then exit is a weapon of mass destruction. If you threaten
someone with Grexit, you push him to the limit of the banking
system’s ability to withstand pressure. Then you destroy the
banking system quickly and then you start from scratch to create new
currency, which takes months to form.
Instead
of saying that Grexit is illegal, they [the
creditors]
say that it’s as destructive and disastrous for us as it is for
you. That was wrong. First, I don’t agree with this position
because it’s blackmail – “Be careful, I’m going to blow my
brains out” – and it allows others to accuse us of blackmail.
It’s ridiculous for the others to accuse a country destroyed over
five years of blackmail. But anyway, it’s the wrong argument. The
correct argument is that a Grexit and all the other measures that the
Greeks have suffered are illegal under international law, under
labour law, under the European treaties, the European Convention on
Human Rights, European declaration of labour rights [contained
in the European
Social Charter].
The
funny thing is that in early 2014, the European Parliament and all of
them started attacking the Troika, with statements that it is
illegal, unaccountable, is following measures that are destroying
human rights, labour rights. Of course, we had a [conservative]
government that didn’t want to hear about this, because it wanted
to attack the opposition and not the creditors. It failed to see that
this was the greatest weapon we had.
For
the weak side, there are only two methods. One is the law – an
appeal for legitimacy – and the other is an appeal for the truth –
who is right and who is wrong in the arguments, and in terms of human
rights. Under the law, everybody is equal. […] So, if
you appeal to the European Court of Justice and say “I am not
treated equally as a member of the EU, NATO” et cetera, they won’t
be able to dismiss it. Especially if you have a fair period of time
to make your case.
Alexis
Tsipras arriving at the Greek presidential office for talks with the
country’s political leaders, July 6th. © Reuters
If
you go through the legal route – and I’m not saying to do that –
you must aim [to
establish the creditor institutions’]
political delegitimisation. Let the whole world know the eurozone is
committing a crime against humanity. Prove it in ten years, I don’t
mind. But you make a case for the courts to say “until we examine
the case, these measures must top”.
Today
it’s too late. It is a matter of political and ideological
hegemony. Varoufakis alone, with his appeal and arguments, managed to
turn public opinion in Europe, even in Germany. The
Eurogroup people stood back. In the beginning of February, [Dutch
finance minister and Eurogroup
president Jeroen]
Dijsselbloem told Varoufakis “You either sign the memorandum that
the others have signed too, or your economy is going to collapse”.
How? “We are going to collapse your banks”. He had said that. In
his last interview to ERT,
the national [Greek
public]
TV [channel],
two days ago, Varoufakis said: “I
didn’t denounce that then, because I was hoping that reason would
prevail in the negotiations with all of the Eurogroup”. So he went
on with the numerous agreements. And credibility as well as money was
lost.
[…]
The Eurogroup is not a proper democratically-functioning body. They
[the
Greek government of Alexis Tsipras]
discovered that, again, very late, when they [the
Eurogroup]
wanted to throw Varoufakis out after the referendum announcement.
Which was basically a gesture to humiliate. Varoufakis says “Who
decides that?” Dijsselbloem says “I decide”. Shouldn’t there
be a vote, shouldn’t there be unanimity? Yes but it’s not
necessarily recorded, there are no minutes taken. He was taping,
others too. Why? Because there are no minutes taken. So there is
nothing formal.
You
can’t say “I went to the Eurogroup and Italy said that, Cyprus
said that” et cetera. So everybody can come out and say anything
they like. No-one can say: “Are you sure you said that? Let’s
look at the minutes”. There are no minutes. Of course, nobody can
come out with a tape recorder. Varoufakis said that of course he kept
the minutes of his own, because he was to report to the prime
minister, and the others do it too. And the others came shouting “Oh!
Varoufakis admitted this, and that”.
The
other countries in such a set-up had to think [German
finance minister Wolfgang]
Schäuble is the king, he controls the others, he can raise his voice
and say “no”. Varoufakis has described incidents that show really
how the Eurozone is completely undemocratic, an almost neo-fascist
euro dictatorship. You cannot rely on what the others are saying.
Varoufakis says that if he could negotiate with one at a time for an
hour, the deal would be struck in a day. But you can’t do that
because each one has different priorities and different people
telling him “no”.
You
cannot argue too much with Schäuble. It would be dangerous, because
you won’t get finance, German banks will want their money back, and
so on. So it’s a institution where you cannot make your voice
heard, so what’s the point in encountering [them]?
There was no-one else but Varoufakis talking straight. Schäuble has
said “How much money do you want [in
order]
to leave the euro?” He doesn’t want Greece in the euro at all. He
was the first to raise the issue of a Grexit back in 2011.
We
went to a war thinking we had the same weapons as them. We have
underestimated their power […] It’s a power that enters the very
fabric of society, the way people think. It controls and blackmails.
We have very few levers. The European edifice is already Kafkaesque.
Editing by Graham Tearse
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.