Features

Since 2008, the Fed has granted unlimited credit to banks at an official rate of 0.25%. In fact, as the General Accounting Office (GAO) has revealed, the Fed has lent close to $16 trillion at an interest rate below 0.25%. [1] The report shows it has not followed its own prudential rules and has not notified Congress.

After the Second World War, in a growing number of Third World countries, policies diverged from those of the former colonial powers. This trend encountered firm opposition from the governments of the major industrialised capitalist countries whose influence held sway with the World Bank (WB) and the IMF. WB projects have a strong political content: to curtail the development of movements challenging the domination/rule of major capitalist powers. The prohibition against taking “political” and “non-economic” considerations into account in WB operations, one of the most important provisions of its charter, is systematically circumvented. The political bias of the Bretton Woods institutions is shown by their financial support to dictatorships ruling in Chile, Brazil, Nicaragua, Congo-Kinshasa and Romania.

The concept of the World as a huge bureaucracy, gradually freed from the influence of the US, is actually a far cry from reality. This mistaken conception is revealed in particular by the North American environmentalist Bruce Rich in his insightful book on the World Bank. [2] In real terms, the institution is firmly under the control of the US government which negotiates, with the governments of other major capitalist powers, the policies to be followed within the World Bank, and under its leadership. It has frequently failed to make the effort to reach a consensus with its principal partners (since the end of the 1950s, these are Japan, Germany, Great Britain and France) and it imposes its views directly on the Bank.

The eurozone banks have the monopoly of lending to the public sector. It is prohibited for the ECB and the eurozone’s central banks to grant loans to public authorities (see box on the ECB). The governments in the eurozone have the possibility of borrowing from publicly owned banks where they still exist, but they do not do so.

Government aid is made up of guarantees, and injections of capital in order to recapitalize the banks. In the period from October 2008 to December 2011, €1,174 trillion (9.3% of EU GDP [3] ) worth of guarantees were underwritten by European Governments as a contingency measure. To these guarantees must be added €442 billion (3.5% of EU GDP) of public capital support to banks. During 2012 and 2013 the recapitalizations continued: about €40 billion in Spain in 2012 alone, more than €50 billion in Greece, about €20 billion in Cyprus, €4 billion more for Dexia bank in Belgium, €3.9 billion for Monte dei Paschi in Italy, €3.7 billion for the Dutch bank SNS, €4.2 billion in Portugal on top of the Portuguese bail-out of the Banco Esperito Santo in July 2014., not forgetting Ireland, Slovenia, Croatia This assistance was granted without any government supervision of the use made of the funds. [4]

Since the banking bubble burst in 2007, the major Central Banks of the most industrialised countries lend massively to private banks at very low interest rates in order to avoid their failure, thus permitting the big banks that take the most advantage to save considerable amounts in interest payments.

We all know the saying “Too big to fail.” In managing the crisis the banks have caused, the governments of the industrialised countries have adopted a new doctrine that might be summed up as “Too big to jail.”

In 2001, the Dexia Group (Dexia SA) took over the Israeli bank Otzar Hashilton Hamekomi. It has been disclosed that this subsidiary – now called Dexia Israel – finances Israeli colonies in the Palestinian territories [5]which means Dexia is involved in the occupation of Palestine. As the platform “Palestine occupée – Dexia impliquée( Occupied Palestine - Dexia Involved)” says, “financing these colonies contravenes international law, in particular article 49 of the fourth Geneva Convention, which states, ’The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own population into the territory it occupies.’” [6]

Another example of the “Too Big to Jail” doctrine: International tax evasion and fraud organised by UBS, Switzerland’s biggest bank.
UBS, which had to be saved from failure in October 2008 by massive injections of Swiss public money, was involved in the LIBOR manipulation scandal, the currency markets manipulation scandal (UBS is the subject of several inquiries by controlling authorities in Hong Kong, US, the UK, and in Switzerland) and the abusive sale of structured Mortgage-Backed (…)

The extremely tolerant approach to the manipulation of interest rates by the governments of the main industrialised countries shows the extent to which the ’Too Big to Jail’ principle is applied. In 2010 the media revealed that a group of eighteen banks had been manipulating the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) from 2005 to 2010. LIBOR is a benchmark rate used for a market of $350 trillion, in assets and financial derivatives, which means it is the second most important benchmark rate in the world after the dollar exchange rate. The rate is based on information provided by eighteen banks about their funding costs in interbank markets. In 2012 evidence was provided of collusion among big banks such as UBS, Barclays, Rabobank, or Royal Bank of Scotland in order to manipulate LIBOR in their own interests.