AP Photo  A beggar sits in Via Montenapoleone shopping  street in downtown Milan, Italy, Tuesday, Dec.13, 2011. Further signs of  stress emerged Tuesday to indicate that Europe's most recent summit  agreement to get the euro countries to bind their economies much closer  together has only made limited progress in pulling the continent out of  its debt crisis. While figures showed that Europe's banks parked more  money at the European Central Bank  than they have at any other time this year, Italy's borrowing rates in  the markets ratcheted even higher and back towards the levels that  forced Greece, Ireland and Portugal into seeking financial bailouts.The  euro “Merkozy” deal agreed last weekend targeting deeper  euro-integration was a step in the right direction but did not offer the  big bazooka that could really ease market tension. It's only part of  the solution 
Europe badly needed: it's not even the solution markets are  waiting for.
So far, wanting “more Europe” has come slowly, and  grudgingly; but crucially, lacked proper leadership to deal with a truly  systemic crisis. What's paralyzing the 
euro-zone is a flaw buried deep  within the monetary union's structure what one writer identified as “the  unresolved conflict between the needs of the euro and the independence  of its members.” Put differently, the link between joint liability of  debts and good behaviour is missing.
Looking back, all those  wasted years of skirting the underlying problems, causing rising budget  deficits and building massive debt exploded in late 2009 when Greece  first toppled into crisis. The euro-zone tried to stanch the problem  with a bailout in May '10 to no avail because Greece is bankrupt; and  did nothing to squelch contagion. By this summer, Ireland and Portugal  had collapsed into bailouts as well; with Italy and Spain now at risk of  default.
Leaders had pressured countries into gut-wrenching  austerity and reform arrangements to stabilise their debt and cut  deficits in the hope of rebuilding investor confidence. That strategy  failed. Other agreements have also drifted. The 2nd Greece bailout in  July came to naught, while the plan to boost the firepower of EFSF  (
European Financial Stability Facility) has since faltered.
Frustration  is building. It culminated in last week's summit, with high hopes to  marshal the might of the entire euro-zone a 
US$13bil economy to provide  an extinguisher powerful enough to put out the debt fire. But all it did  was inject more painkillers; not a cure.
The new deal bears the  hallmark of yet another in the series of half-measures that doesn't  address increasingly vulnerable banks; or go far enough to instil  confidence in the euro-zone's battered debt markets; and certainly  didn't convince S&P from putting the debt of 15 European economies,  including Germany, on negative credit watch, and Moody from cutting the  credit ratings on 
France's top three banks. Sure, there has been  progress but not enough to provide a defining resolution. Leaders are  flirting with risk as Europe is going into recession. We have seen this  movie before. The deal involves a promise by everyone to be a little  more German about their spending and debt. The consensus now is that the  17-nation euro-zone bloc's 
GDP growth will contract by up to 1% in  2012, sharply below this year's already poor growth of 1%.
There  was little in the deal to address the drastic loss of investor  confidence. Euro-zone borrowing costs have resumed rising this week.  Stock markets have retreated after an initial relief rally as optimism  faded. The euro had since sunk below US$1.30, some 12% from its peak in  May. The new “comprehensive” set of measures making-up the euro-zone's  “fiscal compact” failed to calm markets; it included the following:-
-  Constitutional  amendment to balance the fiscal budget. The European Union's (EU) Court  of Justice would verify that each country had a compliant debt brake in  its laws, but with no oversight from Brussels.
 -  The new  “stability union” will adopt a “golden rule” to ensure structural  deficits (i.e. adjusted for boom and bust of economic cycles) below 0.5%  of GDP. For breaching the 3% of GDP deficit limit, nations will suffer  “automatic consequences,” unless member states vote to block them.
 -  The  500-billion-euro European Stability Mechanism (ESM) to replace the  existing bailout fund (EFSF) will be set up in March '12 (instead of  2013).
 -  A 200-billion-euro contribution to the IMF (International  Monetary Fund) for on-lending to enhance the firepower of ESM to help  Europe.
 -  No more “hair-cuts” for private holders of dodgy euro-zone sovereign debts.
 -  New  treaty to change EU's foundational pacts. With UK's rejection, 17 euro  countries and up to 9 of 10 EU nations not using the euro will form a  separate pact outside the EU structure.
 
Prior to the summit, 
ECB  took two decisive steps to shore up the euro-zone: cutting interest rate  to a record low of 1% to soften the looming recession, and crucially  extending longer-term liquidity to Europe's cash-starved banks. Reserve  ratios were also lowered. But ECB managed to avoid mounting pressure to  buy more troubled states' bonds.
As I see it, on the moral hazard  side, there is no multi-trillion bail-out funds and no promise by ECB  to become lender of last resort to monetise everyone's debt, at least  for now. However, the use of the 
European Court of Justice as final  arbiter of rectitude is far from persuasive. Much of the new deal is  reflective of the failed “stability and growth pact” that was around  when the euro was launched, and which both Germany and France breached  shortly thereafter.
Such rules will inevitably be broken because  when it comes to fundamental rights to tax and spend, governments will  always follow the dictates of national electorates rather than Brussels.  No court has the political legitimacy to confront Italian or French  unions when there is social unrest in the streets over budget cuts; the  court won't have the stomach to enforce its decisions. When German  rectitude faces Italian or Spanish politics, we know who will get the  upper hand.
Yet, for me, the irony is that EU had already agreed  less than three months ago to rules that do much of what the new deal is  now seeking to accomplish. They did so without having to endure the  ordeal of changing EU treaties. The “six pack” arrangements were  approved after nearly a year of tortuous negotiations. In broad strokes,  they would have already established the framework of a more integrated  EU.
How to revive confidence? The big problem lies in economic  growth, or the lack of it. Most Europeans still believe in the direct  linkage between spending and economic growth. So, the balanced budget  requirement will work only with tax increases eternally matching higher  spending. This implies a “long-term austerity gap.” As of now, Europe  needs major spending cuts and fiscal reform. But politicians outside  Germany are hoping ECB will eventually come to the rescue. At present,  the ECB stands firm and won't play ball. So the political pressure  mounts.
The new deal simply means continued austerity in the  euro-zone's periphery without any offsetting impact of devaluation or  stimulus at the core. Unemployment already at 10.3% will continue to  rise, placing pressure on households (and youths in Spain, youth  unemployment approaches 50%), governments and banks. Anti-European  sentiment will continue to grow, and populist parties will prosper.  Violence and social unrest will prevail.
Unfortunately, the new  deal has no place for institutional changes to avert such a scenario. I  am afraid if such changes are politically not possible, then the euro is  doomed. It's a matter of time. As post '08 record shows, the biggest  deficit in Europe these days is in ideas to spur growth and in the lack  of political will to enact them. Already, in France, its Socialist Party  presidential candidate is picking up on this undue emphasis on  austerity; stressing Europe's need for growth to get out of the crisis:  “if there is no growth, none of the objectives will be reached.” Alas,  Europe's present leadership seems to have no stomach for this option. So  I am afraid we are stuck with more summit sequels and the certainty of  more uncertainty. Investors' confidence will not return.
Looks  like the euro-zone firewall still looks inadequate. As of now, plans to  leverage the EFSF are mired in technical details. The combined size of  EFSF and ESM is capped at an insufficient 500 billion euro. An infusion  of 200 billion euro through the IMF is not game changing. Even so this  measure is controversial.
ECB has indicated that earmarking is  illegal. Moreover, IMF's shareholders aren't uniformly keen about  directing cash to rich Europe. The US has parliamentary problems; so do  Germany, Austria, Czech, Poland and Ireland, not to mention Holland and  Finland. Pressure by S&P to downgrade and by Moody's, including  denying the likes of France AAA rating, has been priced-in to some  markets. Nevertheless, there is still potential to shake prices. Further  definite downgrades will take another leg down. Moreover, euro-zone is  facing significant risk of a recession next year and a credit crunch.  Another shock may be needed to get European politicians to all read from  the same page.
Already, euro-zone also faces imminent acute  funding problems. Member states need to repay over US$1.2 trillion of  debt in 2012, mostly due in first half-year. In addition, European  banks, heavily dependent on state largesse, have US$665bil of debt  coming due by June '12.
On Germany's insistence, ECB won't be  allowed to unleash US-style quantitative easing or heavily buy up bonds  or even issue euro-zone bonds which I consider critical. Many believe  Germany will eventually relent. Its Chancellor has political problems.  So, euro-zone's big test still lies ahead. One thing is clear. The  market is weighing in. So long as Spanish/Italian bonds cost more than  6%, the crisis is not fixed; confidence has not yet returned. The  refinancing calendar of Europe's sovereigns is onerous. Pressure will  continue to be daunting as long as ECB is not lender of last resort.
The  real problem is Europe's banks remain locked-out of traditional funding  markets, leaving them reliant on ECB which is playing it cool. Faced  with funding freeze, banks will shrink their balance sheets and strangle  growth by not lending. The situation is serious. Euro-zone banks can't  raise cash and won't lend to each other because of counter-party risk.  On top of it all, last week's “stress tests” suggested Europe's banks  are short of 115 billion euro (up from 106 billion euro in October). No  one knows who is really solvent anymore.
For Asia, the growing  uncertainty is killing. The series of sequels following each European  summit leaves a trail of deals, but not the cure. Investors are growing  more nervous in the face of rising risk of recession. As the economic  outlook for Europe worsens, Asia's exporters will experience and expect  continued weakening demand. Most exposed will be trading hubs like South  Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan & Singapore. In 2010, Korea's exports were  equal to 45% of GDP, with Europe as its second largest importer. But  regional powerhouses, China, Japan and India, are also taking a hit.  China is most exposed. Exports accounted for 36% of GDP in 2010 and  Europe is its biggest destination (19%). So far, their huge domestic  market has shielded them from Europe's lack of growth, more than their  smaller neighbours.
Export focus also matters. European slowdown  is already affecting services exports from Hong Kong and Singapore. More  cautious consumers in Europe undermine demand for Korean and Taiwanese  consumer electronics. China's dominance at the lower end of the value  chain is largely immune to shifts in the economic cycle. But what's  worrisome is the continuing kick-the-can-down-the-road attitude of  Europeans which works to prolong the crisis, and translates into reduced  investment and employment in manufacturing capacity. The longer the  crisis is left unresolved, the worse the impact on Asia.
Lord  Keynes wrote in 1921: “about these matters the prospect of a European  War, the price of copper 20 years hence there is no scientific basis on  which to form any calculable probability whatever. We simply do not  know.” And Keynes is right. While the euro enjoys widespread support,  spending more money to save it doesn't.
Germans resent seeing  their hard earned cash diverted to rescue Greeks, perceived to be  irresponsible. Recent polls show that more than 50% of Germans reject  euro-bonds, and 59% oppose further bailouts. We are now stuck with the  classic dilemma with austerity politics bringing no growth and no  framework for common financing, continuing political intransigence has  left politicians with the option to continue  kicking-the-can-down-the-road. Like Keynes, we just don't know how and  how far euro-zone politicians will go towards assuming joint liability  for debts (euro bonds). At some point, Europeans have to make the  fateful choice between national sovereignty and the euro's well being.  Time is of the essence for a real breakthrough. In his recent book,  Harvard's psychologist Steven Pinker argues that mankind is becoming  steadily less warlike and predicted that “today we may be living in the  most peaceable era in human history.” For now, Pinker offers comfort  that we won't go to war over it he is right.
>
  Former banker, Dr Lin is a Harvard educated economist and a British  Chartered Scientist who now spends time writing, teaching &  promoting the public interest. Feedback is most welcome; email: starbizweek@thestar.com.my