Fischer: In Defense of the IMF

Fischer, S. 1998. In Defense of the IMF-Specialized Tools for a Specialized Task. Foreign Affairs 77, no. 4: 103-6.

"Martin Feldstein makes three criticisms of the International Monetary Fund's remedies for the Asian crisis...First, he argues that they are simply the same old IMF austerity medicine, inappropriately dispensed to countries su8ffering from a different malady. Second--and the main theme--he contends that by including in the program a number of structural elements, the IMF is unwisely going beyond its essential task of correcting the balance of payments and intruding into the countries' political processes. Third, he is troubled by the problem of moral hazard--the bailout issue" (103).

Fischer argues that the first two considerations are linked: the structural elements make IMF policies towards SE Asia very different from previous IMF SAP applications, and that the structural elements must be addressed in order for crises like this to not happen in the future. As to the issue of moral hazard, it is, according to this author, overstated.

This crisis stemmed from the following: "First, Thailand and other countries were showing signs of overheating in the form of large trade deficits and real estate and stock market bubbles. Second, pegged exchange-rate regimes had been maintained for too long, encouraging heavy external borrowing, which led, in turn, to excessive foreign exchange risk exposure on the part of domestic financial institutions and corporations. Third, lax prudential rules and financial oversight had permitted the quality of banks' loan portfolios to deteriorate sharply" (104).

Fischer argues that, though Feldstein proposed three questions that the IMF should consider before prescribing structural adjustment, each of these miss the most important question: "Does the program address the underlying causes of the crisis?" (105). "Financial sector and other structural reforms are vital to the reform programs of Thailand, Indonesia, and South Korea because the problems of weak financial institutions, inadequate bank regulation and supervision, and the complicated and non-transparent relations among governments banks, and corporations were central to the economic crisis. IMF lending to these countries would serve no purpose if these problems were not addressed. Nor would it be in the countries' interest to leave the structural and governance issues aside: markets are skeptical of halfhearted reform efforts" (105).