The U.S. prefers an unstable exchange rate for the dollar these days. When the idea that there was not a proper ground for the U.S. Federal Reserve (Fed) to launch an interest rate hike in the near future dominated the markets, we saw that the dollar began losing value. Indeed, this is a required tendency in the medium term, considering overall dynamics both in the U.S. and the world economy. Since the beginning of last week, we have faced a new speculative rise in the dollar. Firstly, Fed authorities, who do not even have the right to vote in the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), made consecutive statements, saying that interest rates must rise, and then the Federal Advisory Council (FAC) suggested that the Fed increase interest rates one or two times in 2016, saying that this would be a prudent step due to the improvement in economic data. Even the ambiguity in this statement is enough to tell many things, but we must ask the following questions seriously: Does the U.S. make these statements on purpose? In other words, is the fact that an unstable dollar exchange rate increase is an uncertainty in developed countries the main reason for all these statements? If so, we are not merely experiencing an economic problem. The current case must be interpreted as an important pillar of a political operation.
We all talk about doing what is rational in economics. Well, let us take a rational look at the U.S. economy and ask which data is improving permanently there. Does the inflation rise in a way that supports growth or does a permanent improvement in the output gap reduce unemployment? Neither are true. Quite the contrary, traditional sectors do not create a stable domestic demand in the U.S. and exports in high-tech sectors, which create the basis of exports, are declining. So these sectors are permanently losing their weight in the U.S. growth data. Let us note that this tendency is a negative indicator for the U.S. economy. In other words, this is a major development against the U.S.'s new strategy, which was initiated by President Barack Obama in 2008. As is known, Republican presidential presumptive nominee Donald Trump's position has become clear. If Fed Chair Janet Yellen and her team pay attention to the FAC's suggestions and raise interest rates two times before the upcoming presidential elections, this will create fluctuations in global markets regardless of its rate. Even a 25-basis point increase will create a 300-basis point upsurge. Trump's election victory will further reduce domestic demand, start pushing unemployment up to the same levels as it was in the crisis period and push even high-tech companies to cut staff because of falling exports.
Moreover, chaos will escalate in developing countries and hotspots such as the Middle East and Africa, which will create a political environment in the U.S. that is reminiscent of the period of former President George W. Bush. We will take a step toward a new world where stability is ensured through a militarism-backed strong dollar and the accompanying U.S. intervention. Before that, they strove to reawaken puppet regimes and old International Monetary Fund (IMF) programs, which were previously imposed on them, in countries like Turkey and Brazil. They laid the groundwork for a judicial coup against Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff and activated a more intricate, multi-phased and well-thought-out scenario in Turkey. PKK and DAESH terror has escalated by using the same methods simultaneously in an attempt to reactivate old economic policies. They strove to paralyze industry and intermediate goods through high interest rates and to put a debt-based import economy in place like an IMF program. They put great pressure on the Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey (CRBT) and prevented it from managing money markets.
They kept on saying that savings were low, inflation was high and the current account deficit would rise in an attempt to give outdated prescriptions that would reduce savings, increase the current account deficit and make both inflation and unemployment permanent, i.e., stagflation, in the long term. They confined the CRBT to a monetary policy in line with their own interests alone. This monetary policy, which was based on inflation and so-called financial stability, was not growth-friendly as it pushed financing costs in the real sector. Indeed, this policy was an inflation-targeting model that was developed in response to the first-generation financial crisis theories. The basis of first-generation financial crisis theories is generally built on the 1979Krugman model, which is the extended version of one of the most basic arguments of orthodox IMF programs. The Krugman model is based on the assumption that uncontrollable government expenditures lead to chronic deficits in public finance. This chronic problem can only be resolved with a very strong anti-inflationist program that has two main pillars: a rapid decline in domestic demand and a nominal anchor practice in exchange rates.
Governments take strict and orthodox measures to rapidly reduce inflation and avoid an appreciation in exchange rates. Such measures can be implemented only in undemocratic regimes. Turkey has overcome this in politics and will achieve this in economic understanding soon. If the inflation does not fall rapidly in this model, exchange rates become valuable, making it difficult for debtor countries to carry out exports, leading to a crisis and rapid collapse in these countries. This is exactly what happened to Turkey during the 2001 crisis. We can separately discuss the rising imports and rapidly collapsing industry as a result of high interest rates and overvalued currencies and their impacts on high inflation. This strategy can succeed only if it is supported by an anti-democratic regime. Let us note that this strategy is being prevented in Turkey these days. President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's avoidance of signing the 20th standby agreement with the IMF in 2008 was the most important step that initiated Turkey's silent revolution.
Meanwhile, Rousseff is about to fall victim to a judicial coup as the Senate has voted to put her on trial. However, I believe Brazil will respond to this malevolent strategy as Turkey did. After all, as Mike Tyson said: "Everyone has a plan ‘till they get punched in the mouth."