Search This Blog

Monday, August 15, 2011

Slow on debt and faster on FDIs


 By W.A. Wijewardena
Dr. Mahathir Mohamed, former Prime Minister of Malaysia and key architect of that country’s economic miracle, had one fine piece of advice to Sri Lanka. When he met the press after a three-day visit to the country in June 2010 organised by the Sri Lanka – Malaysia Business Council, he is reported to have declared that Sri Lanka should ‘go slow on debt and faster on foreign direct investments (FDIs)’ in its new economic strategy to become a country noteworthy in Asia.
Why FDIs? The rationale behind this advice is clear enough. Sri Lanka’s foreign debt is already at unmanageable levels rising from 32 percent of GDP in 2008 to 36 percent in 2009, though it has come down to that level from a peak of 62 percent in 1989. Though the country has not defaulted any foreign loan so far, its fragile foreign reserve base consisting largely of short term borrowed funds poses a great deal of risk of default in the short to medium term. The government’s planned borrowing of a further US $ 1000 million from international markets in 2010 and other foreign borrowings from friendly countries for capital projects already started or in the pipeline will add more to the country’s debt stock instead of reducing it. FDIs, on the other hand are a non-debt source and will help Sri Lanka to acquire the much needed technology, better production techniques, markets, improved management practices and an easy gateway to the rest of the world.
Waking up the ‘Sleeping Lion of Asia’ Dr P. B. Jayasundera, reputed economist and top brain behind the economic policy of the present government, has eloquently synthesised the goal of the government in the concluding remark of the Diamond Jubilee Oration he delivered at the Central Bank recently. He declared that ‘President Rajapaksa has woken up the ‘Sleeping Lion of Asia’ and prepared him for a long marathon of high economic growth in excess of 8 percent per annum’. However, it appears that, despite the debilitating war, the data on the economy’s past performance and economic comparison which Dr Jayasundera made in his lecture do not show that the lion had been sleeping all these years. During the two decades commencing from 1990, the economy had had an average annual growth rate of 5 percent which is considered a satisfactory performance for a war torn country. Hence, the lion had not been in a deep slumber for all this time and it had been crouching and snoozing, impatiently waiting for its day to come. Since the day has now come, all we have to do is to get him to rise, roar and go for its prey with full vigour. Dr. Jayasundera has used the metaphor ‘long marathon’ to describe the strenuous path which the country has to take in order to realise its cherished goal. In this long marathon, Dr Mahathir Mohamed’s piece of advice will be ‘sound counsel’ for the rising lion.

Colonial Era: Large Scale FDIs and Minor Scale Prudent Market Borrowings There were massive investments in roads, transport systems, town developments and new economic enterprises in Sri Lanka during the colonial era. Yet, the bulk of this resource requirement was met through foreign direct investments. According to the late N.U. Jayawardena (NUJ), who wrote a seminal paper in 1934 titled ‘Development of Ceylon’s Trade Since 1834 – From the Coffee Bubble to the latest Depression’, the resources needed for investment during the early 19th century were brought in physical form, namely, bullion and specie (or coins), by the daring entrepreneurs at that time. NUJ calls them coffee prospectors similar to the gold prospectors in 19th Century California and remarks that ‘vast sums of money were released for expenditure by (these) prospectors’. The result was the development of a vibrant plantation industry, with ups and downs from time to time, in the country. According to Professor B. Bastiampillai, who submitted a thesis on ‘The Administration of Sir William Gregory 1872 - 1877’ to the University of London for M.A Degree, the Colombo port was developed during Sir Gregory’s time on a loan from the British Treasury amounting to Sterling 250,000 and a market borrowing of Sterling 380,000. Professor Indrani Munasinghe in her ‘Colonial Economy on Track’ (her PhD Thesis submitted to the University of London) says that the country’s railway system was built during the colonial time by raising loans from time to time in the London capital market. On all these occasions when borrowings were made, the Secretary of State had not approved of them until the relevant borrowing units of the government came up with viable plans to repay the loans in a bid to ensure proper repayment and effective use of the funds. Thus, borrowings were used by colonial rulers as sparingly as possible. This was shown by the low level of foreign borrowings of the country at the time of independence which amounted to about 4 percent of GDP.
Post – Independence Era: High Foreign Debt Dependency The fiscal prudence which the colonial rulers maintained so laboriously during the colonial time underwent ‘a 180 degree turn’ after independence. The country’s new rulers were guided by the desire to attain quick prosperity through a ‘big push’ of the economy, a development model which had gained popularity at that time. They were also ideologically strengthened by the then popular Keynesian economics which advocated deficit financing as a desirable strategy for accelerating economic growth. To make it a reality, an enormous amount of resources had to be invested in physical as well as human infrastructure. But the nation lacked domestically generated savings to finance such expenditure programmes on account of high consumption levels. The average savings during the first two decades after independence amounted to about 12 percent of GDP, while investments amounted to about 18 percent of GDP. The terms of trade were unfavourable to Sri Lanka, meaning that the country had to sacrifice more than one unit of exports to bring in one unit of imports to the country. The current account of the Balance of Payments was eternally in deficit except in the rubber boom years of the early 1950s. Consequently, with no adequate domestic savings, the country did not have a choice except resorting to foreign borrowings.
The Liberal Use of Concessionary Funding Thus, Sri Lanka went for foreign borrowings in a big way and they were facilitated by the availability of multilateral and bilateral concessionary funding during the first five decades after independence. Consequently, foreign debt component as a percent of GDP rose slowly and steadily to 18 percent by 1970, 34 percent by 1980 and 55 percent by 1990. Thereafter, there was a slight decline in foreign borrowings as a percent of GDP, but it did not mean that the country had reduced its total public debt levels. The decline in foreign borrowing ratio was simply replaced by domestic borrowings which rose from 41 percent of GDP in 1990 to 54 percent in 2000.
Increased Reliance on Commercial Borrowings In the first decade of the new millennium, Sri Lanka’s per capita income crossed the $ 1000 threshold, elevating the country from a low income one to a lower middle income one. It also resulted in the country’s losing its access to concessionary funding, thereby forcing it to tap commercial markets. The result was the gradual increase in the non – concessionary and commercial loans in the total foreign borrowings of the government: in 2005, they accounted for 4 percent of total foreign borrowings; by 2009, the share went up to 28 percent. With the proposed commercial

borrowings in 2010 and in the next three years, this share is expected to rise further, thereby raising the country’s risk levels too.
Ills of Commercial Borrowings Commercial lenders do not try to impose conditions on the borrowers, especially those relating to economic reforms and human rights. The negotiations on such borrowings could also be completed in a shorter period than concessionary borrowings. Money is also available promptly for the borrower to use for any budgetary purpose. Hence, many governments have found commercial borrowings more palatable than concessionary borrowings. Yet, the terms and conditions of commercial borrowings are harsher than those of concessionary borrowings forcing the borrowing countries to make tougher sacrifices. Their interest rates are significantly higher, maturity and grace periods are shorter and repayments are in a single payment known as a ‘single bullet payment’. Hence, unless a country utilises these borrowings for projects which are priorities, have shorter gestation periods and generate higher rates of return than the interest paid on them, the borrowing country cannot avoid falling into an inescapable foreign debt trap. The observation of these prudent norms are specifically relevant for commercial borrowings from countries like Iran and China whose loan conditions are much harsher than those raised from international financial markets.
No Ponzi Schemes Though Sri Lanka has not got into a serious foreign debt problem as yet, the fast increase in its borrowings from commercial sources may increase the country’s vulnerability significantly. It now appears that, to repay the commercial loans raised in the last few years, the country will have to borrow more in the next few years. The critics have equated this to operating a huge ‘Ponzi Scheme’ by the government because, like the legendary Charles Ponzi of early 20th Century who paid his previous lenders out of the money borrowed from the new lenders, the government too has to continually raise new loans to repay the previous loans. The critics have brought out the risk factor involved in this type of an operation: Ponzi had to default everyone when he later found it impossible to find new investors; the same fate may befall on the government if it too is unable to raise new loans, especially in periods of global financial crises.
The Colonial Wisdom Comes in Handy The colonial wisdom in raising commercial loans for investment was that the borrower had to build a sinking fund to repay the loan out of the sale proceeds of the enterprise. For instance, when the Ceylon Railway Authorities raised commercial loans in the London financial market to build the country’s railway system, the Secretary of State made it mandatory for the railway authorities to charge economic fares from railway users and build sinking funds to repay the loans when they matured. According to Professor Indrani Munasinghe, the prudent management made railways remunerative from the start and after transferring the required amounts to sinking funds, there was a balance surplus available to be credited to the general revenue of the government. It, therefore, took the Ponzi feature present in the current commercial borrowings out of the system by avoiding the necessity for raising new loans to repay old ones. It behoves the government to infuse this colonial wisdom of prudent debt management to large scale commercial borrowers like the Ports Authority and Ceylon Electricity Board by making it mandatory for them to build the required sinking funds out of revenue to save the country from potential future foreign debt crises.
FDIs: Non - Repayable Debt Involved As Dr Mahathir Mohamed has advised and as was practised by colonial authorities, Sri Lanka should promote FDIs to compensate for the inadequacy of country’s savings. Since FDIs do not help the government directly to fill the budget gap, it may have to go for a certain amount of loans in the short to medium term. But, it is necessary that the government should go slow on such borrowings. To facilitate the government to reduce its reliance on borrowings, it should reduce its expenditure programmes and raise its revenue sources. When the government cuts down its budget deficit, it will be able to release funds for the private sector to engage in economic activities, a process known as ‘crowding in’ of the private sector rather than ‘crowding it out’ as is being presently done.
Improve Human Capital and Get Technology through FDIs FDIs help a country to acquire new technology without costs. This is specifically important to Sri Lanka because it does
4
not invest sufficiently in the development of new technology. Without technology, it cannot produce goods for the global market. This was the strategy adopted by the original Asian tigers, namely, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Korea in their initial phase of economic development and the strategy being adopted by new Asian tigers, China, Malaysia and Thailand in their present phase of development. It is also important to develop the country’s human capital base to enable it to use the advanced technology. Singapore and South Korea did it by developing the higher education systems in the line of the best universities in the world. China is also presently engaged in a similar exercise. For Sri Lanka to attract high tech related FDIs, it is absolutely necessary to build the required human capital base. Sri Lanka could not attract any giant in the pharmaceutical industry in the past because of the shortage of biomedical scientists. It is, therefore, time for Sri Lanka to look forward and train the required scientists, engineers and managers to staff high tech industries to be set up in the country. These are essential prerequisites for the ‘Lion of Sri Lanka’ to rise from its crouching position and undertake its strenuous long marathon. (W.A. Wijewardena can be reached on waw1949@gmail.com)

CEPA with India – Part Three


CEPA with India – Part Three The last two parts of this series dealt with the background to the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement or CEPA with India, its main components and how Sri Lanka would miss another opportunity if the country fails to sign the agreement in due time. This part will look into some positive signs of improving trade relations with India, emerging global developments posing threats to Sri Lanka if the country chooses to ignore them, the misconception of a CEPA hatched in secrecy and the bitter ground realities which Sri Lanka has to face if the ratification of CEPA is further delayed.
Three unrelated news items The last two weeks saw three unrelated news items relating to India hitting the worldwide media. The first was about a passenger craft being fabricated by a Sri Lankan company, Colombo Dockyard, for Indian government and delivering the same to its client (can be accessed at http://www.lbo.lk/fullstory.php?nid=2016046090). According to the news item, the administrator of India‟s Lakshadweep Island had contracted Colombo Dockyard to fabricate a passenger craft that can carry 250 passengers and 100 tonnes of cargo. The craft, named „Lakshadweep Sea‟, had been designed by an Indian company, Larsen and Toubro, and fabricated by Colombo Dockyard by using Japanese technology. At the flagging off ceremony, the Indian High Commissioner in Sri Lanka, Ashok K Kantha, is reported to have hailed the enterprise as an important landmark in the emerging new economic relations between Sri Lanka and India. This was indeed the second of such passenger craft fabricated by Colombo Dockyard for the Indian Government, the first one named „Arabian Sea‟ being delivered in January 2010. Given India‟s technological and engineering superiority, its decision to buy passenger craft from Sri Lanka is unprecedented. It indeed heralds a new era: if Sri Lanka can match Indian aspirations for quality and technical superiority, there are opportunities for the small island nation to supply the big giant to the north with high tech products. So, the differences in the size won‟t matter any more. The second news item reported on the fielding of a road show team by the Sri Lankan company, Laugfs Gas, in India to solicit investments for its Initial Public Offering or IPO from Indian investors, in addition to the two teams sent to Singapore and Malaysia (can be accessed at http://www.news360.lk/business-finance/laugfs-gas-road-shows-in-3-

countries). According to the chairman of the company, W K H Wegapitiya, there have been positive sentiments expressed in all the three countries for the IPO under reference in particular and investment in Sri Lanka, in general. Tapping the vast Indian market for raising capital funds for Sri Lankan companies is once again a new favourable trend that is emerging. This was unthinkable a few months ago. The first two reports related to two rare instances of economic opportunities which Sri Lanka had enjoyed with India. The third related to a budding relationship that is developing between the two giants in Asia, namely, India and China posing a threat to Sri Lanka as well as creating an opportunity if Sri Lanka decides to act fast. It was reported that the Chinese Premier, Wen Jiabao, had announced when he met his Indian counterpart in Hanoi, Vietnam on the side of the ASEAN annual summit, that he plans to visit India shortly (can be accessed at http://news.rediff.com/slide-show/2010/oct/29/slide-show-1-chinese-pm-to-visit-india-later-this-year.htm). In fact, the dates have been fixed for the middle December, 2010 highlighting the urgency of the need. China‟s Central China Television or CCTV too reported on Wen as saying that, “it is always beneficial for the two rising giants in Asia to have a closer economic and political relationship”. The message being delivered by the proposed economic relationship between the two countries to an up-comer like Sri Lanka is clear: the giants will get together and create a super giant; before the super giant becomes a threat and being exploited by others, Sri Lanka should be ready to jump the bandwagon and derive benefits by aligning with India.
CEPA is a boon and not a bane When economic opportunities become available, the profit seeking people will always tap those opportunities. Remember the Kautilyan saying that, “no land will be foreign to an enterprising individual”. If there are governmental restrictions banning them, depending on its end profitability, the whole transaction will go underground. This was how labour was shifted through „illegal human smuggling‟ from India to Sri Lanka in 1950s and 1960s. When there are no such restrictions, the market system will drive people to tap markets beyond the borders of their resident countries. The two instances of the economic relationship mentioned above testify to such a spontaneous market development. If there are facilitating governmental agreements, the cost of conducting such transactions will fall significantly. Hence, formal agreements among nations always promote economic relationships benefiting all. India, which has understood this ground reality well, has signed a number of such agreements with ASEAN, Singapore, South Korea, and Malaysia. It is planning to enter into similar agreements with Japan, Thailand, European Union, Chile and South Africa. Hence, CEPA will be a boon and not a bane for budding Sri Lankan businesses.
Misconceptions about CEPA Some have attacked CEPA on the ground that it has been hatched in secrecy. The critics have charged that there was no proper consultation with business and industry before the drafting of the agreement. Hence, it has been labelled as a document secretly agreed upon between the governments of India and Sri Lanka. It has further been claimed that those who have participated from the Sri Lankan side in the negotiations have grossly sold out the country to Indian interests. That was the reason for many local businessmen to take to streets in protest of CEPA.
How trade agreements are negotiated When trade agreements are negotiated between two countries, there is a set procedure which they normally follow. In the first instance, a study group representing the two countries is appointed to examine the feasibility of a free trade agreement and the areas which the proposed agreement should cover. After the study group reports, the proposed agreement is taken up by the political authorities of the two countries involved. This leads to a wide discussion of the subject at the political authority level. If the agreement is acceptable, then it is

referred to the industry for its views. If there are suggestions from the industry, they are too incorporated into the agreement and negotiated further before the final version is agreed upon. Once everything has been finalised, the leaders of the two countries formally ratify the agreement. Then, a task force is appointed, composed of the officials as well as private sector businessmen, to implement the agreement, iron out difficulties and sort out issues.
CEPA was born after wide consultations When the idea of a comprehensive economic partnership between India and Sri Lanka was first mooted in 2002, a joint study group representing a wide array of experts from both countries was appointed. From the Sri Lankan side, the study group was led by a leading businessman, Ken Balendra, who had functioned as the CEO of the Keells Group. The other members had been drawn from the Central Bank, governmental institutions and the private sector. Similarly, the Indian group was led by Rakesh Mohan, Deputy Governor of the Reserve Bank of India and included the managing director of the Tata Group representing the private sector. Hence, when the study group report was prepared, the private sector inputs and aspirations had been reckoned at the highest level. When the agreement was negotiated, there was even a wider consultation with the business and industry. Dr Saman Kelegama, one of the negotiators of CEPA representing the Colombo based Institute of Policy Studies, in an interview with The Nation, has revealed that the Ceylon Chamber of Commerce or CCC had acted as the conduit between the government of Sri Lanka and the private sector representing all other Chambers, such as the Federation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry, National Chamber of Commerce, National Chamber of Commerce and Industry and Small and Medium Industry Chamber and so on. Kelegama says that all members of all these chambers were constantly kept informed of the developments of the agreement at every stage. In addition, many private companies in various sub sectors coming under CEPA had been constantly consulted by the main official team that drafted the agreement. These sub sectors included maritime services, banking and finance, insurance, IT companies, hotels and resorts and organisations in the health sector. These consultations had gone on for over three years and the views expressed by these organisations had been incorporated into the final draft agreement. Hence, it is a misconception that CEPA has been born in secrecy without due industry consultations.
Delay CEPA and lose opportunities As mentioned in the previous parts, while Sri Lanka has been sitting on its backside on CEPA, India has covered almost the entire world with similar free trade agreements or comprehensive partnership agreements. India has looked east, north, west and even the southeast. Its recent entry to ASEAN Plus will help it to tap a very large market at its own doorstep. This new group known as ASEAN Plus includes, in addition to original ASEAN countries, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand and has a total population of nearly two billion people. It has been announced that both US and Russia will join ASEAN Plus next year. Then, ASEAN Plus will produce slightly over a half of the world‟s GDP and boast of a market made up of more than three and a half billion people. India is definitely set to exploit all the available new market opportunities. Sri Lanka will be a loser if it chooses to remain oblivious to this global development.
The government’s plan: Awaken the sleeping lion Dr P B Jayasundera, the top most policy maker and administrator, in delivering the Central Bank‟s 60th Anniversary Commemoration Lecture in August, 2010, drove home the enshrined goal of the government in the next decade: awaken the sleeping lion and march with it a long marathon to prosperity. After 30 years of a senseless and devastating internal war, when the country has returned to peace, to usher such a goal is indeed laudable.

But it requires a coordinated policy package that looks north, east and everywhere as this column had argued in its previous parts to integrate Sri Lanka‟s economy seamlessly to the emerging global economy. Having very close economic ties with India is one way to start its long march towards prosperity with the newly awakened lion.
Awaken the lion quickly or lose the prey If the Sri Lankan lion continues to be aloof in getting integrated to the emerging global developments, the result will be that the much prized prey to its north will move away. The signs are that India has already found new economic partners who are more prosperous, dynamic and fast growing. These new partners are the future champions of global science and technology and knowledge base, two most requirements of a sustainable economic prosperity. Sri Lanka‟s $ 45 billion economy and 20 million population is nothing for India when compared with an emerging ASEAN Plus economy of $ 30 trillion and a population of three and a half billion which India would automatically get through its partnership with this new economic bloc. So, the choice before Sri Lanka today is clear: act fast and get into the formal CEPA with India without any delay. Otherwise, Sri Lanka will find that its much coveted prey to the north has simply moved away beyond its reach.
(W A Wijewardena can be reached on waw1949@gmail.com)

CEPA WITH INDIA – PART TWO SRI LANKA SHOULD NOW LOOK NORTH, EAST AND EVERYWHERE



In the previous part, we discussed the historical evolution of global free trade and the circumstances that led both Sri Lanka and India to outpace other SAARC members and sign in 1998 the first ever free trade agreement in South Asia. The success of this agreement prompted the two countries to look beyond trade in goods and work toward a comprehensive economic cooperation and partnership, the logical evolution of free trade agreements into their ‘nest generation’ setting. However, just before the proposed Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement or CEPA was to be formally ratified by the leaders of the two countries, it ran into hot weather in Sri Lanka heated by a wave of angry protests by groups opposed to it. As a way to diffuse the situation, the government of Sri Lanka unilaterally decided to shelve CEPA and it now remains for both countries to pull it out from its resting place before it gathers dust and set the mechanism in motion for its quick implementation.
In this part, we look at CEPA more closely and the economic consequences which Sri Lanka has to bear if it is not implemented early.
CEPA: Main Components
CEPA, while improving the existing Free Trade Agreement or FTA with India, has added three more new areas of economic cooperation and partnership between the two countries. These three new areas are the free movement of approved services, greater flows of investment and economic cooperation in identified areas.
Improvement on the FTA
FTA permitted free trade between India and Sri Lanka in a large number of goods. But to address the fears of domestic producers in both countries about losing markets, a safeguard was introduced in the form of a negative list of goods which had been taken out from the free trade agreement. The objective was to permit the producers

of these negative list goods sufficient time to gain capability of competing with goods coming from the other country and eventually integrate to the larger Indo – Sri Lanka market seamlessly. Hence, it was expected to periodically review the negative list and remove the goods progressively so that both countries could equally benefit from free trade.
CEPA has proposed to remove only a small number of goods from the negative list immediately. Even then, Sri Lanka has been required to remove only 32 goods from its negative list, while India has agreed to remove a larger number amounting to 114 goods. This has facilitated Sri Lanka to be comfortable with the pace of trade liberalisation without being overly concerned about the loss of markets to India. Even with the removal of these goods from the negative lists, Sri Lanka’s negative list will remain four times bigger than that of India giving a greater protection to Sri Lankan domestic producers.
In addition, in the proposed CEPA, India has agreed to expand the trade in garments and textiles too. While expanding the quota of 8 million pieces of garments that were permitted to Sri Lanka under FTA, India has agreed to increase Sri Lanka’s textile trade too beyond the FTA levels.
This concession is extremely important to Sri Lanka currently, because it is losing garment markets both in the United States and the European Union. The former has been due to the competition from the cheaper products from Bangladesh, while the latter has been prompted by the GSP Plus issues. With the growing middle class in India which is bigger than the combined market of both the US and EU, Sri Lanka should necessarily ‘look north’ to find solutions to its trade issues.
Opening of Services
It is the proposed opening of services under CEPA which has received the fiercest protest from the Sri Lankan professionals.
This is understandable because a sudden inflow of professionals into the local market will increase supply, promote competition and reduce the high professional fees which these professionals could now earn in the relatively protected market. However, the local consumers will benefit immediately due to greater opportunities and lower fees and the Sri Lanka’s economy in the long run due to the improved quality of professionals. Even without CEPA, this has already taken place in the case of education and health services. A large number of Sri Lanka students who cannot get enough higher education places within the country proceeds to India every year; similarly, many patronise Indian hospitals for quality medical treatment for many serious ailments. This is a situation where the consumers cross the borders at great costs to buy services from another country. Under CEPA, it would be the service providers who will cross the borders making it more convenient and cheaper for the consumers in the host country.
Many have feared that CEPA would open up the services sectors of the two countries wholesale in an equal manner, but that is not the case. India has offered to make a deeper and a wider opening of its services sector to Sri Lankan professionals. Sri Lanka has been requested to do it in small measures gradually. Accordingly, India would open up 80 sub sectors upfront, while Sri Lanka would do so only in 20 sub sectors. In this manner, India will allow unlimited number of visas to executives, managers and specialists to work in India; Sri Lanka will do so only in two sectors, namely, IT and

maritime services, but thereagain, it is limited to investment projects made by Indians in the country.
Indian Investments: a Must in the Current Context
Sri Lanka’s drive toward an accelerated phase of growth requires investments in massive proportions. Given the country’s low savings and the government’s chronic dissavings in the budget, the widened savings – investment gap has to be filled with foreign resources. In view of the dwindled concessionary foreign resource flows, the country has recently tapped the costly commercial markets abroad to raise the required funds. But, this is not an advisable policy strategy in the long run because it invariably drives the country to an inescapable foreign debt trap. In these circumstances, as this column had highlighted earlier, foreign direct investments or FDIs are the country’s savior.
Sri Lanka’s past track record in attracting FDIs has been rather dismal. When comparable countries like Vietnam had been mobilising FDI flows worth of billions of dollars year after year, during the five year period from 2005 to 2009, Sri Lanka managed to attract on average only $ 461 million per annum. In 2010, though the target was modest one billion dollars, according to the performance of the first half of the year, it could at most attract only a flow of $ 600 million. In these circumstances, Indian private investments in Sri Lanka under CEPA have to be viewed as an unexpected bonus about which the country does not have to do much canvassing or lobbying.
Economic Cooperation: Sri Lanka is the Beneficiary
India is emerging as a world economic power and some analysts project that it has the potential of growing even faster than China. The reputed British journal, The Economist, in its issue of 2nd October, 2010, has expressed confidence that India could outpace China due to its still growing work force and strong and versatile private companies. When compared to Sri Lanka, India’s technological and scientific base is much improved and developed. Hence, by going into an economic cooperation pact with India, Sri Lanka always stands to benefit.
The areas of cooperation as identified by the Joint Study Group appointed by the two countries in 2002 to study on CEPA are in transport and travel, air services, ferry services, railways, ICT, ocean resource exploration, education, health, agriculture and sports. In addition, a recommendation has been made to establish a higher education institute in Sri Lanka with Indian support in the style of India’s reputed Indian Institutes of Technology.
Sri Lanka Sleeps, but India acts
While Sri Lanka has been sleeping over CEPA for over 7 years since 2003, India has been active in negotiating or signing comprehensive economic cooperation and partnership agreements with a number of countries. First, it was with ASEAN in terms of India’s ‘looking east policy’ promulgated in early 1990s. Accordingly, a comprehensive economic cooperation agreement or CECA was signed with ASEAN in general in 2003. To make it more comprehensive and tailor - made, individual CECAs are now being negotiated with Thailand, Malaysia, South Korea and Singapore and all these agreements are expected to be completed before the end of 2010. Outside ASEAN, a similar agreement is being negotiated with Japan too on the basis of a Joint Study Group Report completed in 2006. India expects to conclude this agreement shortly.

Moving further forward from its initial looking east policy, India has now been looking in all directions: looking north (EU, Pakistan and Nepal), looking west (Gulf countries, Mauritius, Americas and Chile) and looking south (South Africa). This pragmatic approach by India is due to the recognition that its future depends on its successful integration to the global economy.
Despite its huge domestic market of which Sri Lanka should be envious, India and Indian companies believe that they should build a viable export base in order to harness the economies of scale in the long run. This should be done not by offending or annoying the potential economic partners, but by cooperating with them. This is similar to the ‘leap-frogging’ policy pursued by Singapore in its initial phase of economic development. India too is leap – frogging around the globe in search of new markets and opportunities.
Many in Sri Lanka believe that India cannot do without Sri Lanka. India’s $ 1.3 trillion economy is about 43 times bigger than Sri Lanka’s $ 40 billion economy. Similarly, India’s $ 177 billion export industry is 22 times bigger than Sri Lanka’s $ 8 billion export industry. When India has accumulated $ 76 billion worth of FDIs up to end of 2009, Sri Lanka has done so only up to a woeful amount of $ 3 billion. So, without Sri Lanka, India can exist, sustain and prosper. But for Sri Lanka, Indian support is definitely a booster when it comes to realising its future economic aspirations.
Sri Lanka Should Look North, East and Everywhere
For Sri Lanka, India is an important source of economic energy. In the ancient times, Sri Lanka had immensely benefited not only from material goods that came from India, but also from various scientists, spiritual leaders, philosophers and artisans who crossed the borders without any hindrance. Hence, in the current period, Sri Lanka should first ‘look north’ to its mighty big brother for support. But, dependence on a single country is also a risk, as noted by Lee Kuan Yew when he planned Singapore’s initial development programmes. Hence, Sri Lanka should diversify its economic relationships covering as many countries as possible. In this exercise, Sri Lanka should therefore start ‘looking east’ toward, ASEAN, China and Japan. Then, Sri Lanka should look west (EU and Americas) and South East (Australia and New Zealand).
What this means is that Sri Lanka should have CEPAs not only with India but also with all other trading partners.
In the next part, we will discuss myths and realities about CEPA with India.
(W.A. Wijewardena can be reached on waw1949@gmail.com)

Kautilya Reborn 22 ,CEPA with India: Not a marriage with a feared monster(




 Many who are critical of CEPA tend to paint a picture of a feared monster for India. It is usually portrayed as a country willing and ready swallow Sri Lanka to its advantage
Popular uprising against CEPA A news item that had appeared in papers three months ago regarding Sri Lanka’s plan to sign a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, popularly known as CEPA, with India converted the whole island spontaneously to a boiling pot. First, it was local entrepreneurs who broke the tradition and took to streets like their opposite number, the militant trade union members. It was reported that, having marched to the Presidential residence, Temple Trees holding anti – CEPA banners, they submitted a petition voicing their objections to CEPA in the strongest terms possible. The leftist political parties which normally suspect both the intention and the direction of free trade too had announced their plans for a long agitation campaign against the proposed move. Then, it was the turn of professionals like lawyers, accountants and physicians to have their objections known in public. This was followed by a series of debates on CEPA in both printed and electronic media between its supporters and opponents. The websites that carried news on CEPA or write ups on same were inundated with comments, some even taking a cynical stand, by bloggers. When the situation appeared to be going out of control, the Sri Lankan government tried to diffuse it by shelving the CEPA plan temporarily and thereby allowing the agitators to enjoy a brief victory.
Another lost decade? The analysts outside the debate say that Sri Lanka has thus lost a valuable opportunity of getting aligned to global development process through trade in goods and services. The country’s declared reluctance to go ahead with CEPA has given a wrong signal that the country was upholding the ‘autarky trade regimes’ now discarded by all and committing itself to a policy reversion. While Sri Lanka had been immersed in a self acquired pride about its protected industries and businesses, the rest of

the world, especially India, had been moving much faster along the route of free trade in goods and services. When Sri Lanka wakes up from its slumber, it will be another decade of missing opportunities like the lost decades of 1980s and 1990s.
Sri Lanka’s history of trade in goods and services If there is one country that has no morality to object to free trade in goods and services in the modern world, that country is Sri Lanka. That is because Sri Lanka, for more than two thousand years, had benefited from free trade with other nations. Having being located on a convenient naval route that linked the East and the West, the ancient Lanka had been a meeting point for traders who came from Europe and the Middle East from the western side and those who came from the Far East from the eastern side. During the reign of Parakramabahu the Great (1153-86 AD) in the Polonnaruwa period, the country was an entrepot trading centre which stocked goods from all over the world and resold the same to visiting traders. One striking example is the reference by Professor Senerat Paranawitana in the History of Ceylon published by the University of Ceylon (Volume Two) to an Egyptian geographer named Idris that the King had bought all the alcohol brought from Arak and resold to other traders at prices fixed by him. Dr S Arasaratnam, drawing on sources in archives in both Portugal and Holland says in his Dutch Power in Ceylon, that Lanka in the 15th to 17th centuries had exported the country’s elephants and arecanuts to India and imported the much needed rice and textiles. Both Mahavansa and Chulavansa have numerous references to various artisans coming from foreign lands and providing their services in architecture, sculpture, tank building and aesthetics such as singing, dancing and composing. Ancient Lanka had built up enormous amounts of wealth and prosperity by these means. Hence, it was a complete free trade in goods and services without entering into formal CEPAs with other countries.
Kautilyan prescription Kautilya recommended to the king to build a variety of trade routes, because trade allows a country to acquire wealth and become prosperous. He argued that it was better to have a large number of trade routes, namely, land routes, sea routes and inland waterway routes, even if they had not been built to high standards. Instead of having foot paths, a country should have cart tracks and roads which can be used by draught animals. This is equivalent to building highways in the modern era. The king should also protect all these trade routes from attacks by highwaymen and abuse by kings’ own officials. An official with the title of the Chief Controller of Shipping had been tasked to look after the welfare of sea traders and seamen, eradicate sea piracy, ensure seaworthiness of vessels and rescue vessels in distress in high seas. The importance which Kautilya gave to sea trade with other countries can be gauged by the requirement that the chief controller has to compensate out of his resources if any vessel was lost due to his negligence. In ethics of Chanakya, he had further emphasised this by pronouncing that ‘no land is foreign for an enterprising person’ meaning that traders should visit other countries with stocks of goods for generating wealth. Hence, in ancient times, free engagement in trade in goods and services with other nations was an accepted norm of economic activities.
Free trade in modern era The western world has undergone several phases of trade liberalisations during the last five centuries or so. First, it was the ‘autarky regimes’ where trade in any form was a taboo. Then came the ‘mercantilist era’ in which it was argued that a country should export but not import. The logic behind this wisdom could be understood by looking at the pattern of trading and payments that prevailed in the 16th and 18th centuries during which mercantilism reigned. At that time, all trade transactions were paid by gold and an exporting country accumulated such gold making it a prosperous nation with immense military power. If it did import goods, the country lost gold thereby reducing its wealth and power too. Hence, powerful countries were supposed to do only exporting goods and not importing them.

It was left to Adam Smith in late 18th century to dispute mercantilism and make the case for free trade among nations. This was carried forward by David Ricardo and subsequent economists who argued that countries can raise their wealth and prosperity through gains from trade. This truth had dawned on western philosophers only toward late 19th century. But it had been understood and practised by their eastern counterparts for more than two millennia.
Indo – Lanka free trade agreement: The forerunner to CEPA Though trade is an economic activity, free trade agreements have always originated from the political side of nations. This is because it is the political machineries that have imposed restrictions on free trade and if those restrictions are to be unwound, that too should be done by the same political machineries. Accordingly, in early 1990s, the political leadership in South Asia, organised as the South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation or SAARC, decided that the region should go for free trade among its member countries by having a South Asian Free Trade Agreement or SAFTA. However, due to political animosities among some member countries, the progress on this was very slow. When it was evident that SAFTA was not going to be a reality in the short to medium term, the idea of having a separate free trade agreement between Sri Lanka and India was mooted by some sections in both countries in mid 1990s. The negotiations that followed this initiative culminated in India and Sri Lanka signing a free trade agreement in 1998 which became effective in 2000.
ILFTA: The outcome Though ILFTA ran into implementation difficulties due to the non – co-operation by the low level bureaucracies in both countries, it in fact led to a vast improvement in trade between the two countries. While the volume of trade improved significantly, the trade gap between the two countries narrowed in favour of Sri Lanka. In 1999, Sri Lanka’s total imports from and exports to India amounted to $560 million. This shot up four times to $2401 million in 2005 and even in the gloomy foreign trade scenario that prevailed after 2008, the total trade amounted to $2142 million in 2009. The improvement in the trade gap between Sri Lanka and India was much prominent during this period. In 1999, when Sri Lanka exported one unit to India, it had to import 10.5 units from India. By 2005, this ratio fell to one export to 3.2 imports. Even with the low trade scenario in 2009, the ratio stood at one export to 5.6 imports. In 1999, Sri Lanka’s trade with India was practically negligible. But in 2009, India was Sri Lanka’s number one importer and number six exporter.
CEPA: The Next Generation Economic Co-operation with India Two years after ILFTA, in 2002, the leaders of both India and Sri Lanka decided that it is time for both countries to look into economic prospects beyond free trade in goods. Accordingly, a joint study group consisting of experts from both countries was formed to study and report on the possibility of having a wider economic co-operation in the form of a comprehensive economic partnership between the two countries. This study group made its recommendation in October 2003 that India and Sri Lanka should go for a formal Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement or CEPA, emphasising the urgency of concluding the negotiations involved within four to six months of the submission of the report. In terms of this, the study group expected the CEPA to be operative by April, 2004. However, the subsequent events that took place in Sri Lanka including a change in the government two times, first from the existing ruling party to a new party and then within the new ruling party from one leader to another, it took more than five years for both countries to come up with a reasonable agreement on the format and the contents of

such a comprehensive economic partnership between the two countries. It is this draft which has now gone into hot weather in Sri Lanka.
The main ingredients of CEPA CEPA, in addition to the trade in goods covered in ILFTA, has three other areas of economic co-operation between the two countries. They include trade in services, promotion of private investment flows and a third category specifically beneficial to Sri Lanka, namely, transfer of technology and facilities from India to Sri Lanka in the areas of transportation, infrastructure, education, tourism and information and communication technology. In this last category of co-operation, it has been proposed to provide Indian support for modernising Sri Lanka’s railway system and establishing a higher learning institution in the model of Indian Institutes of Technology. Given India’s growing world leadership in these areas, it is not uncommon for the Joint Study Group to come up with this recommendation.
Is India a feared monster? Many who are critical of CEPA tend to paint a picture of a feared monster for India. It is usually portrayed as a country willing and ready swallow Sri Lanka to its advantage. The largeness of the Indian economy, Indian hegemony in the past, perceived underhand operations by its agents and its ability to subdue Sri Lanka both economically and militarily at any time it wishes would have contributed to form this view in their minds. Yet India is one of the next generation world leaders known as BRIC countries, that is, Brazil, Russia, India and China. Another country which has joined the BRIC Group of late is South Africa and Sri Lanka, even if it comes up as a wonder of Asia, will not be able to be equal or surpass India in this respect. It is therefore beneficial for Sri Lanka to learn to cooperate with this perceived monster. In the next part, we will examine CEPA in more detail and if Sri Lanka does not go for it, where it will stand in the global development arena. (W A Wijewardena can be reached on waw1949@gmail.com)

South Sudan: 5 key questions answered



On July 9 2011, the Republic of South Sudan became the world’s newest country. But it is also one of its poorest, joining the ranks of the most underdeveloped nations on earth. Yet with the rich oil deposits within its new borders, South Sudan may be able to overcome the daunting obstacles it faces – if it comes to peaceful terms with its northern neighbor, Sudan.
Here are five frequently asked questions answered:
1. Why did the Republic of South Sudan secede from the North?
The decision to secede can be traced to the northern Sudanese government's consistent policy of marginalization of the southern part of the country since Sudan became independent in 1956. The people of the South, who are non-Arab, Christian, and animist, have long felt oppressed by their neighbors in the Arab and Muslim North.
The southern liberation struggle led by the late Dr. John Garang called for a unified Sudan "on a new basis," through a representative government that upheld basic rights and respect for Sudan's diverse peoples in the north, south, east, and west of the country. But when the 1983-2005 civil war ended, a signed North-South peace deal granted southerners the right to a self-determination vote after six years.
When that referendum was held last January, nearly 99 percent of southerners voted for secession of the South, rejecting the hope enshrined in the 2005 peace deal: that unity could be made "attractive" to southerners who had suffered for decades under northern rule.

2. Is the conflict between Sudan and South Sudan really over?

It is difficult to predict, but based on the policy of brinkmanship that the ruling parties of the North and South have honed over the past six years – collectively reaching the point of crisis in order to exact concessions from each other – political, if not military, confrontation between the two governments is likely to continue.
Weeks of heavy North-South fighting over the disputed border town of Abyei and in the contested region of South Kordofan killed scores and displaced more than 700,000 people in June, according to the United Nations.
Even if skirmishes end between the two armies along their disputed shared border, which is littered with oil and other resource deposits, proxy politics are likely to keep military tensions high. The southern government has repeatedly accused Khartoum of arming a number of rebel militias active in the oil-producing southern borderlands, allegations the North has repeatedly denied.
Meanwhile, Khartoum levels its own allegations against the South's Army for its rumored links to rebel groups fighting for increased autonomy in Darfur during a nearly decade-long conflict there that some observers have deemed to be a genocide by Khartoum against Darfuri citizens.

3. What are the top challenges facing South Sudan?

As it attempts to build a functioning nation-state, the young southern government faces no shortage of obstacles: illiteracy, poor health care, lack of infrastructure, human rights abuses by the southern military, and developing its oil resources.
Given the sheer scale of the problems, it is hard to know where this government should begin.
Rough estimates from a 2006 government household survey and other UN studies indicate that more than 90 percent of South Sudanese women cannot read or write.
Only 20 percent of southerners will ever receive health care at a clinic or hospital. Farmers cannot get their crops to market due to the profound lack of infrastructure in the Texas-sized territory.
The former guerrilla movement-turned-national army, in charge of maintaining security in a place where many civilians have at least tried to hold onto their war-time guns, stands accused of rights abuses in its recent campaigns to rout out rebel forces opposed to the southern government.
And lest anyone forget, South Sudan is now one of Africa's most oil-rich countries.
Management of the new country's oil sector – and managing to simultaneously diversify the economy away from complete oil-dependency, perhaps via agriculture – will determine much about how strong the foundations of the new state will be.
Experts in national development say it will take at least a generation for the southern government to find its footing as a service-delivering, rights-respecting entity.

4. How will South Sudan's oil wealth likely be spent?

Ideally, the country's oil revenues – which should increase after the North and South reach a settlement on management of their still-shared industry – will be spent addressing the daunting challenges outlined above.
In practice, some of these revenues will likely be squandered as the corruption and nepotism that has blemished the southern government's reputation in its six years of existence takes deeper root in the post-independence period.

5. When will South Sudan be self-sufficient?

Nongovernmental organizations and UN agencies currently provide 80 percent of basic services to south-erners. This will not change in the short term.
Gradual transfer of service delivery from NGOs and the UN to the South Sudanese government will hopefully begin in the coming years.
If it does not, growing discontent from citizens could hurt the ruling Sudan People's Liberation Movement, which leads the government, and stoke internal violence and insecurity as frustration builds among the most marginalized minority ethnic groups

Rumors claim Apple’s iPhone 5 and iPad 3 Suppliers Gearing up for October Launch


 


iphone 5
A new report by DigiTimes is claiming that the companies that manufacture and supply components to be used in the production of Apple’s next-generation iPhone and iPad devices are preparing for an October launch of both of these devices. The report cites sources throughout Apple’s supply chain and claims that Apple will be launching a single new iPhone model, which is expected as there was no new iPhone hardware previewed at the 2011 Worldwide Developers Conference, alongside the iPad 3.
While the iPhone rumors are hardly new, the iPad 3 news is somewhat surprising and contradicts what many had previously reported about the next iPad, including a report made this week by a FBR Capital Markets analyst stating that prototype iPad 3 models wouldn’t even appear until 2012. Apple launched the iPad 2 just a few months ago, packing quite a few improvements but lacking an upgraded display which dismayed journalists and users alike. The DigiTimes report claims that the new iPad 3 will remedy the display issue, with a source quoted that “Apple is considering designing an even thinner and lighter tablet PC with its panel resolution increasing to 250dpi.”
Analysts expect that Apple will ship somewhere between six and seven million units of the next iPhone handset – call it the iPhone 5 – in the third quarter alone. Combined with the still strong-selling iPhone 4, iPhone shipments for the quarter could reach up to 25 million. While there are few analyst reports that include an iPad 3 release in their predictions, with a new iPad launching before the holidays Apple could see 2011 sales top 40 million for their wildly-selling tablet device.
The DigiTimes report went a step further to name some of the companies that will be supplying parts for Apple’s devices, including display manufacturers Wintek and TPK, battery suppliers Dynapack and Simplo, chassis supplier Catcher and camera supplier Largan Precision. As expected, the devices will be put together by Foxconn at their plants in China.
Improvements for the next iPhone are expected to be somewhat minor, with most rumors pointing to a processor upgrade to the iPad 2’s “A5” chip, an upgrade to the rear camera, and possibly a slightly larger screen. It’s also expected that Apple will separate the rear camera from the flash, to reduce “red eye” artifacts in photos.
None of these rumors have been confirmed or denied by Apple, who has been keeping a tight lid on its device development.

Choosing the Good Eggs




Small actions: Researchers noticed that the cellular innards of an egg pulsed more rapidly immediately after fertilization, and that the movement was directed toward the spot where the sperm entered. The arrows indicate the direction of the pulses.
Credit: Anna Ajduk

BIOMEDICINE


Activity inside fertilized eggs might offer clues to their reproductive success—a finding with possible implications for in-vitro fertilization.
  • BY KAREN WEINTRAUB
By watching the tiny, pulsing motions of a newly fertilized mouse egg, researchers in a new study could determine which eggs stood the best chance of producing healthy mice. The same procedure should also work with human eggs, the researchers said yesterday, opening up the possibility of dramatically improving the success rates of in-vitro fertilization.
In a paper in the current issue of Nature Communications, the researchers found that the insides of a newly fertilized egg slowly vibrate, and that the speed and direction of these movements was associated with the egg's likelihood of success.
Using high-speed photography, the researchers could predict within hours of fertilization whether an egg would be viable—the fastest and earliest method ever devised, says the paper's senior author, Magdalena Zernicka-Goetz, of the University of Cambridge. The method is potentially safer than current techniques, which require removing cells from the developing embryo to determine their viability.
The researchers have not tried this approach yet with human eggs, but say there's no reason it wouldn't work. "The same type of movements do happen in human eggs upon fertilization—we checked it," Zernicka-Goetz said at a news conference. "We are in the process of discussing with an in-vitro fertilization clinic in the U.K. to initiate such tests on human embryos."



Doctors have long sought ways to judge whether an embryo is worth implanting. This is particularly important in the United States because insurance often doesn't cover in-vitro fertilization, and many prospective parents can't afford the costly procedure more than once or twice, says Andrew La Barbera, scientific director for the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.
Doctors often implant multiple embryos to increase a woman's chances of a successful pregnancy. But this also increases the chances of twins and other multiple births, which are riskier for the babies.
By using a rapid-speed camera, the researchers could see that the cytoplasm—the liquid surrounding the cell's organelles—began to move more rapidly after fertilization than before. That pulsing continued for about four hours, though it waxed and waned in three distinct stages. The direction of the movement also changed during these periods. The vibrations slowed once a cell nucleus was formed.
La Barbera agrees that human embryos likely show similar movements, and says he found the paper elegant and novel. But he doubts that this kind of test could be as predictive in human eggs as the Cambridge researchers suggest it is in mice. Human couples have far more genetic diversity than the inbred mice used in the research, La Barbera says, and older women can have defects in their eggs that might not be visible with this technique. 
"This study has great promise," he says. "It remains to be seen how well these results can be translated into humans."
Janice Evans, an associate professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, shares La Barbera's concerns about the applicability of the work to human embryos. The researchers' insight is profound, Evans says, but it is still too soon to tell if their method will work with human embryos.

அமெரிக்க நிதிச் சிக்கல் – உலகு மீண்டும் சந்திக்க இருக்கும் நிதி நெருக்கடி!



உலகின் மிகப் பெரிய பொருளாதார வல்லரசாகத் திகழ்ந்த அமெரிக்கா அரசுக்கு வாங்கிய கடனை திரும்பத் தரும் தகுதி குறைந்துள்ளது என்று  S &P எனும் பொருளாதார மதிப்பீட்டு அமைப்பு அறிவித்ததையடுத்து, உலகின் பங்குச் சந்தைகளில், பிரளயம் ஏற்பட்டுப் புரட்டிப் போட்டது போல் கடும் சரிவு ஏற்பட்டது.  
நிறுவனங்களில் இருந்து நாடுகள் வரை, அவற்றின் கடன் பெறும் அல்லது திருப்பிக் கட்டும் திறன் பற்றி ஒரு பொருளாதார மதிப்பீட்டு நிறுவனம் தரும் திறன் சான்று, அமெரிக்கா போன்றதொரு பொருளாதார வல்லரசைத் திணறச் செய்யுமா? என்கிற வினாவிற்கு விடை தேட வேண்டுமெனில், அதற்கு அந்நாட்டு பொருளாதார நிலையை சற்று ஆழமாகவே நோக்க வேண்டியதாகிறது.
அமெரிக்க ஐக்கிய குடியரசின் இன்றைய கடன் என்பது 14.58 டிரில்லியனாக உள்ளது. இதற்கு மேலும் கடன் வாங்கித்தான் அந்நாட்டு அரசு சில நலத் திட்டங்களை நிறைவேற்ற வேண்டும் என்ற நிலை வந்தபோது, கடன் வரம்பை உயர்த்த வேண்டும் என்ற கோரிக்கை அந்நாட்டு காங்கிரஸில் (நாடாளுமன்றத்தில்) எழுந்தது. கடும் போராட்டத்திற்குப் பிறகு அந்தக் கோரிக்கை நிறைவேறியது. தனது செலவீனங்களுக்காக மீண்டும் சந்தைக்குச் சென்று 2 டிரில்லியன் வரை கடன் பெறுவதற்கு அமெரிக்க அரசின் கருவூலம் கடன் பத்திரங்களை விற்க இருந்த நிலையில்தான், S&P அமெரிக்க அரசு மீதான கடன் மதிப்புத் திறனை AAA யில் இருந்து AA+ ஆக குறைத்தது. 
கடன் பத்திரங்களில் முதலீடு செய்யும் நாடுகள், வங்கிகள், நிதியமைப்புகள் ஆகியன, தங்களுடைய நிதிக்கு ஒரு பாதுகாப்பான முதலீடாக கருதும் அமெரிக்க கருவூல கடன் பத்திரங்களில் முதலீடு செய்தால், தேவைப்படும்போது வட்டியுடன் திரும்பப் பெற முடியுமா என்ற ஐயத்தை கிளறிவிட்டதே, அமெரிக்கா இந்த அளவிற்கு பதறக் காரணமாக அமைந்தது. இந்த அறிவிப்பு வந்தவுடனேயே, பெரும் முதலீட்டு நிறுவனங்கள் தங்கத்தில் முதலீடு செய்யத் தொடங்கின. இதுவே அமெரிக்கா, ஐரோப்பிய நாடுகள், இந்தியா உள்ளிட்ட ஆசிய நாடுகளின் பங்குச் சந்தைகளில் ஏற்பட்ட வீழ்ச்சிக்கு வித்திட்டது. 

அமெரிக்காவிற்கு இந்த நிலை எப்படி ஏற்பட்டது? 
2008ஆம் ஆண்டு அமெரிக்காவில் ஏற்பட்ட சப் பிரைம் கிரைஸிஸ் என்றழைக்கப்பட்ட குறைந்த வட்டிக் கடன்கள் திரும்பச் செலுத்தப்படாத காரணத்தினால் உருவான நிதிச் சிக்கல், அந்நாட்டின் நிதி நிறுவனங்களையும், காப்பீடு நிறுவனங்களையும் பெருமளவு பாதித்தது . பெரும் நிதி நிறுவனங்களாகத் திகழ்ந்த வங்கிகள், காப்பீடு நிறுவனங்கள் ஆகியவற்றை தூக்கி நிறுத்த முற்பட்ட அமெரிக்க அரசு, அவைகளுக்கு வட்டியில்லாக் கடனாக ஒரு டிரில்லியன் டாலர்களை வழங்கியது. அதனைப் பெற்றுக் கொண்ட நிதி நிறுவனங்களும், வங்கிகளும் தங்களின் கட்ட வேண்டிய கடன் பத்திரங்களுக்கு உதவ வேண்டும் என்று கேட்டன. அந்த கடன் பத்திரங்களை அமெரிக்க கருவூலமே வாங்கியது. எவ்வளவிற்குத் தெரியுமா? 1.75 டிரில்லயன் டாலர்களுக்கு! ஆக, ஒட்டுமொத்தமாக 2.75 டிரில்லியன் டாலர் வட்டியில்லாக் கடனாகவும், நட்டத்தில் போன சொத்துக்களையும் அமெரிக்க கருவூலம் முதலீடு செய்து வாங்கியது. இதனைத்தான் ஊக்க நிதியுதவி என்று கூறப்பட்டது (To stimulate the economy).
வட்டியில்லாமல் கொடுத்த கடனைப் பெற்றுக்கொண்ட  வங்கிகளும், நிதி நிறுவனங்களும், காப்பீடு நிறுவனங்களும், அந்தக் கடனைக் கொண்டு, தாங்கள் கட்டித் தீர்க்க வேண்டிய கடனை கட்டிவிட்டு, மீதமுள்ள பணத்தை அமெரிக்க அரசின் கருவூல கடன் பத்திரங்களிலேயே முதலீடு செய்தன! 
அதாவது, அமெரிக்க அரசு தங்களுக்கு அளித்த வட்டியில்லாக் கடனை பெற்று, தங்கள் கடன் சுமையைக் குறைத்துக்கொண்ட அந்த நிறுவனங்கள், மீதமிருந்த தொகையை அமெரிக்க அரசும் கருவூல கடன் பத்திரங்களிலேயே 2 முதல் 3 % வட்டிக்கு முதலீடு செய்தன. இதனை அமெரிக்க அரசால் தடுக்க முடியவில்லை. காரணம் அங்குள்ள சட்டங்கள் அப்படி! கடனைக் கொடுத்தாய், அதற்காக கேள்வி கேட்காதே, நாங்கள் எங்கு வேண்டுமானாலும் முதலீடு செய்வேன் என்றன. 
கடன் பத்திரங்களில் செய்ய முதலீட்டை திரும்பப் பெறுங்கள் என்றது, அதற்கு ஒரு கட்டணத்தை அமெரிக்க கருவூலம் வழங்க ஒப்புக்கொண்டதையடுத்து, பத்திரங்களை மீண்டும் அரசுக்கே விற்றன! இதனால் ஒரு பக்கம் வட்டி வருவாய், மறுபக்கம் தனியாக கட்டணம் வேறு என்று வசூலித்தன. 
நிதி நிறுவனங்கள் தங்களு்டைய நிர்வாகத்தின் உயர் அதிகாரிகளுக்கு அளித்துவரும் மாத ஊதியத்தை குறைக்க வேண்டும் என்று மக்களிடையே கூக்குரல் எழுந்தது. ஆனால் ‘நீ அளித்த கடனை திருப்பி செலுத்தி விட்டேன். என்னை நீ கேள்வி கேட்காதே என்றன வங்கிகள். 
அதுமட்டுமல்ல, அமெரிக்க கருவூலத்தில் முதலீடு செய்ததனால் கிடைத்த வருவாயைக் கொண்டு பொதுமக்களுக்கு – தொழில் உள்ளிட்ட முதலீடுகளுக்கு – கடன் தரவீர்கள் அல்லவா என்று அமெரிக்க அரசு கேட்டதற்கு, அதிக வருவாயைத் தரும் பங்குகளில்தான் முதலீடு செய்வோம் என்றன நிதி நிறுவனங்கள்! இங்கும் தடையாக நின்றது அமெரிக்க அரசு நிறைவேற்றி கடைபிடித்து வரும் சட்ட முறைகள்தான். கட்டுப்பாடற்ற சந்தைப் பொருளாதாரத்தில் எந்த நிறுவனத்தின் செயல்முறையையும் அரசு கட்டுப்படுத்தக் கூடாது என்பது விதி. எனவே எங்கள் மீது எந்த விதிமுறையும் திணிக்காதே என்றன நிதி நிறுவனங்கள்.
ஆக, வீட்டுக் கடன் சிக்கலால் திவாலான வங்கிகளையும், நிறுவனங்களையும் அமெரிக்க அரசு காப்பாற்றிவிட்டது. ஆனால், அவைகள் நாட்டின் பொருளாதாரத்தை நிலைநிறுத்த ஆற்ற வேண்டிய கடமையை ஆற்றுமாறு செய்ய முடியவில்லை. அமெரிக்க அரசு செய்த ஊக்க நிதியுதவியால் அதற்கு 2.75 டிரில்லியன் கடன் சுமை ஏற்பட்டது. ஆனால் திவாலான வங்கிகள் முன்னெப்போதும் காணாத இலாபத்தை பெற்றன. இலாபத்தை அவைகள் பங்குச் சந்தையில் முதலீடு செய்ததால் பங்குச் சந்தைக் குறியீடுகள் செயற்கையாக உயர்த்தப்பட்டன. கடன் மீதான வட்டி விகிதம் வரலாறு காணாத அளவிற்கு குறைந்தது. 
ஆனால், அமெரிக்க அரசு செய்த ஊக்க நிதியுதவியால் அந்நாட்டுப் பொருளாதாரத்தில் எந்த முன்னேற்றமும் ஏற்படவில்லை. வேலையில்லா திண்டாட்டம் அதிகரித்தது, மக்களின் வாங்கும் சக்தி குறைந்தது. இதனால் அரசு செலவீனம் நாளுக்கு நாள் அதிகரித்துக்கொண்டே வந்தது. அதற்கான நிதித் தேவைக்கு அந்த சந்தையில் கடன் பத்திரங்களை விற்று நிதி ஆதாரத்தை தொடர்ந்து திரட்டி வந்தது. இந்த நிலையில்தான் இதற்கு மேலும் கடன் பட முடியாது, வாங்கினால் திருப்பிக் கட்ட முடியாது என்ற நிலை ஏற்பட்டது. அதுவே இன்றைய நிதிச் சிக்கலிற்கு அடிப்படையானது.
இதே நிலை ஐரோப்பிய ஒன்றிய நாடுகளிலும் நிலவுகிறது. கிரீஸ் கடன் சுமையால் நொருங்கிப் போயுள்ளது. அதன் தாக்கம் மற்ற ஐரோப்பிய நாடுகளிலும் பரவத் தொடங்கியுள்ளது. கடனை திருப்பிச் செலுத்த வரி விதித்தல் தவிர வேறு வழியில்லை என்ற நிலை. அதனால்தான், அமெரிக்க அதிபர் ஒபாமா, நாட்டின் பெரும் பணக்காரர்களின் வருவாய் மீதான வரியை அதிகரிக்கப் போவதாகவும், அதே நேரத்தில் அரசின் திட்டச் செலவுகளை குறைக்கப்போவதாகவும் அறிவித்துள்ளார்.
அமெரிக்கா கடைபிடித்து வரும் திறந்த நிலை, சந்தைச் சார்பு பொருளாதாரத்தால் அந்நாட்டில் வருவாய் பகிர்வு எப்படியுள்ளது என்பது குறித்த விவரம் தலையை சுற்ற வைக்கிறது. 2008ஆம் ஆண்டு திரட்டப்பட்ட அந்த புள்ளி விவரப்படி, அந்நாட்டின் மக்கள் தொகையில் உயர் மட்டத்திலுள்ள 1 விழுக்காடு மக்களின் தனி நபர் ஆண்டு வருவாய் சராசரியாக 11 இலட்சம் டாலர்களாக உள்ளது. அடுத்த 9 விழுக்காடு மக்களின் தனி நபர் வருவாய் 1,64,000 டாலர்களாக உள்ளது. மீதமுள்ள 90 விழுக்காட்டு மக்களின் சராசரி தனி நபர் வருவாய் 31 ஆயிரம் டாலர்கள் மட்டுமே. அதிலும் 10 விழுக்காட்டினரை பிழந்தெடுத்துவிட்டு, மீதமுள்ள அடித்தட்டு மக்களின் தனி நபர் ஆண்டு வருவாயைப் பார்த்தால் 19,000 டாலர்கள் மட்டுமே. அமெரிக்க ஐக்கிய குடியரசின் வறுமைக் கோடு என்பது ஆண்டிற்கு 18,000 டாலர்கள் என்று வரையறை செய்யப்பட்டுள்ளது. அதாவது அமெரிக்க குடிமக்களில் 80 விழுக்காட்டினர், வறுமைக் கோட்டிற்கு சற்றே மேலாக உள்ளனர். 
மக்கள் தொகையில் கீழ் மட்டத்திலுள்ள 80 விழுக்காட்டினரின் வருவாய் 1950இல் இருந்து 1980 வரை 75 விழுக்காடு உயர்ந்துள்ளது. ஆனால் 1980 முதல் 2008ஆம் ஆண்டு வரையிலான 28 ஆண்டுகளில் அவர்களின் தனி நபர் சராசரி வருவாய் 1 விழுக்காடு மட்டுமே அதிகரித்துள்ளது.
ஆனால் இதே காலகட்டத்தில் அந்நாட்டு மக்கள் தொகையில் உயர் வருவாய் பெறுவோர் ஒட்டுமொத்த மக்கள் தொகையில் 0.001 விழுக்காட்டினரின் வருவாய் 1950இல் இருந்து 80 வரை 80 விழுக்காடு உயர்ந்துள்ளது, 1980 முதல் 2008 வரையிலான கால கட்டத்தில் அவர்களின் வருவாய் 403 விழுக்காடு உயர்ந்துள்ளது! 
இதே காலகட்டத்தில், பெரும் நிறுவனங்கள் செலுத்திய வரி 1950இல் மொத்த வரி வருவாயில் 25% ஆக இருந்தது. 2008இல் அது மொத்த வரி வருவாயில் விழுக்காடாக குறைந்துள்ளது. இதே காலத்தில் ஊதியம் பெறும் பணியாளர்களின் வருவான வரி பிடித்தம் மொத்த வரி வருவாயில் 9 விழுக்காடு இருந்தது, 43 விழுக்காடாக உயர்ந்துள்ளது! அமெரிக்க அதிபர்களாக வந்த ஒவ்வொருவரும் பெரு நிறுவனங்களின் வருமான வரி விகிதத்தை தொடர்ந்து குறைத்து வந்துள்ளனர்! 
அந்நாட்டின் தொழில் உற்பத்தி துறை 58% வேலை வாய்ப்பைத் தந்துள்ளது, அது தற்போது 18% ஆக குறைந்துள்ளது. இதனால் அந்நாட்டு பெரும்பான்மை குடிமக்களின் வீட்டு வருவாய் (House hold income) பெருமளவிற்கு குறைந்துள்ளது. இது அவர்களின் வாங்கும் சக்தியைக் குறைத்துவிட்டது. அமெரிக்க, ஐரோப்பிய சந்தையை எதிர்பார்த்து இந்தியா உள்ளிட்ட ஆசிய நாடுகளில் செழித்த ஏற்றுமதிகள் இதனால் பாதிக்கப்படுகின்றன. 
இதனால்தான், அமெரிக்கா, ஐரோப்பிய பொருளாதாரங்கள் பின்னடைவைச் சந்திக்கும்போது அது இந்தியா உள்ளிட்ட மூன்றாவது உலக நாடுகளின் பொருளாதாரத்தையும் பாதிக்கின்றன. எனவேதான் பங்குச் சந்தைகளில் நேற்று அப்படியொரு வீழ்ச்சி ஏற்பட்டது. 
இப்படிப்பட்ட நிலை ஏற்படுவதற்கான முக்கிய காரணிகள் என்று பொருளாதார நிபுணர்கள் கூறுவது, 1. நாட்டு மக்களிடையே நிலவும் கடுமையான வருவாய் ஏற்றத் தாழ்வு, 2. வேலை வாய்ப்பை உருவாக்கும் உற்பத்தித் துறையில் முதலீடு குறைவதும், அதிக வருவாய் தரும் நிச்சயமற்ற பங்குச் சந்தை உள்ளிட்ட முதலீடுகளும், வரி விதிப்பில் உள்ள முரண்களும் 3. சுதந்திரமான சந்தை பொருளாதாரப் பாதுகாப்பிற்கு உத்தரவாதமளிக்காது என்பதுதான் என்கின்றனர்.
அந்நிய நிறுவன முதலீடுகள், அந்நிய நேரடி முதலீடுகள் ஆகியவற்றை மட்டுமே நம்பி பொருளாதார ‘வளர்ச்சி’யை உறுதி செய்ய முற்பட்டால் அது இந்த நாட்டை தாங்க முடியாத வீழ்ச்சிக்கே வழி வகுக்கும்.