Serbia is one of those CEE States
that is an enigma. A Serb friend who was
in both the Federal Yugoslav government and in the post-Yugo declining rump
into the Serbia bit once Montenegro had gone its own way in 2006 reminds me
regularly that Yugoslavia had negotiated 80% of the acquis for EU Membership
during the 80s.
And as a kid growing up in Berkshire,
I would often play football in the park against Yugoslav kids so travel was not
an issue for a country seen as a half-way house breaching both sides of the
iron curtain. Indeed taking the train
from Yugoslavia to Trieste for your jeans to flog off back home or to proudly
wear was essentially the stamp of adulthood!
Fast forward three two decades.
Whilst the grand air of the
capital of the Balkans remains (even the Slovenes come to party at weekends in
Belgrade) in substance a lot has changed.
Aside from the Cyrillic alphabet and proximity of languages there are
similarities – but also key differences – with another city coming to terms
with loss of empire, Moscow.
For a start Belgrade lost a major
trump card that Moscow retained by not retaining its high-calibre Federal civil
service. Yes the EU annually rubber-stamps that the Serbian government has good
administrative capacity, but drill down into actual mechanics and you’ll find a
lot of bright well educated cadres but lack of a joined up government. Meaning
decisions often lack clear strategic thinking or where – as for say for
macro-stabilisation there seems to be some semblance of grey matter – alas it
is often on the back of external conditionality (DC or Brussels).
And there tend to be a lot of governments… where each new minister
brings his mates along for key positions in the civil service. Meaning a
continuous dilution of capacity and institutional memory in the ministries. Again, not so in Moscow.
Russia remains a good risk but
faces real challenges of how it reaches the nirvana of a broad-based economic
landscape that often escapes resource rich economies. Serbia on the other seems
often to be on the cusp of another macro shock, often due to failure to keep to
terms on the previous stabilisation programme, and lacks any real resource
endowment.
Whilst CEE watchers no doubt
review the macro numbers and compare with other EM economies, what they often
miss is the transition gap it still has to overcome, certainly relative to the
CEE economies in the EU.
Although Serbia underwent a rapid
transformation in the immediate period after the ousting of Milosovic in 2000 (cherry
picking reforms that had worked elsewhere as someone from the World Bank once
said) there has been not much reform since the early 2000s and Serbia rode the
long cyclical wave of benign global and CEE growth when it was all about
convergence plays.
Whilst the new EU Member States had
to go through (some) hoops, Serbia had no such external anchor. And whereas the
likes of Estonia or even Slovenia saw themselves very much in the western
European family (if only to get away from the Ruuski bear), Serbia has until
recently remained very agnostic if not plain disinterested (again the
post-empire blues that also affected Britain’s initial two-fingers at the EU
before its eventual entry in 1974 – although the fingers haven’t quite
descended!).
Result: an economy with enormous structural
issues, a bloated civil service, massive unemployment, fundamental issues for
the business environment, an uncompetitive trade sector and economic growth
that has relied on domestic absorption, often on the back of credit – where a
lot of the bank credit is owned by a coterie of banks from the Euro-risk
economies of Greece, Austria, Italy and to a lesser extent France – and where
there is a high FX-debt profile through Euro-isation of loans.
Can Serbia manage the transition
and macro-fiscal challenges? I helped put together the EU’s Emergency Budget
Support for Serbia in 2009 and worked on budget reform prior to that and whilst I have confidence in the Central Bank
that sits on reasonable reserves I am less convinced about political will
beyond short-term fixes on the fiscal side.
The country’s metrics on transition
are often only beaten to bottom by Kosovo or Bosnia. I am also not entirely
convinced about the magnetism of the EU despite promise of greater aid flows. Serbia
is surrounded by the EU so has no choice but to integrate although it can
affect the speed of convergence. But one wonders if the spectre of the EU of
the 2020s that is moving toward a more German-led model of an integrated
federation will be palatable to the Serbian politicians – although the same could
be said for the Hungarians or Romanians.
But at least the latter are in
the EU club. And with it have the implicit EU-put that entails through soft EU
loans or via Structural Fund transfers.
What does this mean for Serbian
investors and Serbian country risk?
1. There
is a fat tail risk on the downside, despite recent IMF-led efforts for fiscal
consolidation announced last week and the likelihood of another Eurobond issue
or putative loan from Manchester City…sorry UAE.
2. From
past experience, the fiscal plan will be implemented in part but then fade away
3. With
the real exchange rate still 1/5th overvalued and continuing current
account pressure there is a risk of further devaluation that the
authorities will want to prevent from becoming excessive, even with the reserve
buffer which in turn will feed into higher imported inflation
4. The
US taper-risk will lead to EM differentiation and which will affect Serbia dis-proportionately
when it happens in 2014.
5. Getting
back to the tube-metaphor, Serbia risk is under-priced. Mind the Gap.
No comments:
Post a Comment