Blog Post

Tim Geithner and Europe’s phone number

According to a famous (yet apocryphal) joke by Henry Kissinger, there is no telephone number to call to speak to Europe. Indeed the fragmentation of European power and representation makes it difficult to determine who can speak for the EU or the euro area. US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner however has found out with whom to speak to discuss responses to the euro crisis. This, at least, is what his official schedule indicates: from January 2010 to June 2012, the last date for which his calendar is publicly available, he had no less than 168 meetings or phone calls with Euro-area officials, plus 114 with the IMF. And the person he spoke most often with, apart from the IMF chief, was the ECB president.

By: Date: February 4, 2013 Topic: Global Economics & Governance

According to Henry Kissinger’s famous (yet apocryphal) joke, there is no telephone number for Europe. US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, however, seems to have resolved Kissinger’s dilemma by calling not one number but dozens. This, at least, is what his official schedule indicates: from January 2010 to June 2012, the last date for which his calendar is publicly available, he had no fewer than 168 meetings or phone calls with euro-area officials, plus 114 with the International Monetary Fund. And the person he spoke to most often, apart from the IMF chief, was the European Central Bank president.[1]

I had the idea to examine this data when I was recently asked to speak at a conference on the US and the euro-area crisis. I was looking for some sort of quantitative evidence of the involvement of the Obama administration in the European discussion, and thought the frequency of these contacts would provide an informative indicator. Obviously, the calendar does not indicate what the subject matter of discussions was. But what else could have justified 58 contacts in 30 months between Tim Geithner and the ECB’s successive presidents, Jean-Claude Trichet and Mario Draghi? Admittedly, he may have had a more diverse array of topics to discuss with German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble (36 contacts) or his French counterparts (32 contacts). But why would have he called them significantly more than the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer (19 contacts), with whom euro-area issues must also have been discussed? The one institution with which he certainly addressed other issues is the IMF (114 contacts with successive Fund chiefs Strauss-Kahn and Lagarde, and deputies Lipsky and Lipton), but here again, knowing how concentrated on Europe the IMF has been in recent years, the euro crisis certainly featured high on the agenda.    

Figure 1 displays the distribution of contacts for the entire period. Three striking facts emerge:

  • First, the data confirm the key role played by the IMF and the frequency of contact it has with the US Treasury Secretary. Nevertheless, there were significantly more contacts with European policymakers (168 against 114), which can be regarded as indicative of the direct involvement of the US administration in European policy discussions;
  • Second, the ECB emerges on top of all European institutions, far ahead of the European Commission and even further ahead of the Eurogroup, for which only two contacts are recorded (a G3 conference call in March 2011 and Geithner’s participation in a Eurogroup meeting in Poland in September 2011). There is little doubt that for the US Treasury, “Mr Euro” is first and foremost the ECB president. This finding is especially striking, as the ECB’s institutional interlocutor is the Fed, not the US Treasury.;
  • Third, there have been many more bilateral contacts with the German and French finance ministers than with the European Commission or the chair of the Eurogroup. This confirms the driving role of major national capitals.

Figure 2 displays the number of monthly contacts distributed into three broad groups: European institutions, national governments, and the IMF. It indicates four episodes of intensive transatlantic consultations:

  • Before the agreement on the first Greek programme in May 2010. In March, Geithner had no fewer than 9 calls or meetings with Fund chief Strauss-Kahn;
  • In autumn 2010, in the run-up to the Irish programme. In November 2010, at a time of controversy between the IMF and the ECB over a possible bail-in of Irish bank creditors, Geithner had 5 contacts with the Fund and 5 with Jean-Claude Trichet;
  • From spring 2011 to end 2011 (with a short respite in late summer/early autumn). This was a period of intense discussions on the restructuring of the Greek debt and the search for a comprehensive response to an escalating crisis. The US administration was especially vocal on the so-called “firewall”. Contacts during this period were more frequent than ever before and involved all categories of European partner;
  • In spring 2012. During this period, in which discussions increasingly focused on the plans for a banking union, contacts with the Fund were relatively less frequent, in comparison to those with European institutions and national capitals. During this period Geithner had several contacts with his Spanish counterpart De Guindos, and with Italian PM and Finance Minister Mario Monti. 

Summing up, the data suggests constant and very active involvement on the part of the Obama administration in the search for solutions to the euro crisis. They also tell us who matters in Europe in the eyes of the US administration: clearly, the one European institution that really counts is the ECB. In spite of the complex governance arrangements in place, other European institutions matter much less than Berlin and Paris.  

Thanks to Julian Lentz for his assistance in the compilation of data.


[1] Excluding contacts with Mario Draghi prior to his appointment to the ECB. Draghi was chairing the Financial Stability Board, so presumably contacts up until November 2011 were devoted to G20 affairs.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

Read article Download PDF More by this author
 

Working Paper

The impact economy: balancing profit and impact

Governments and companies can reinforce each other in their pursuit of sustainable development, which is based on three pillars: economic, social and environmental. An impact economy, in which governments and companies balance profit and impact, is best placed to achieve the United Nations sustainable development goals.

By: Dirk Schoenmaker Topic: Energy & Climate, Global Economics & Governance Date: July 7, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Opinion

Credible emerging market central banks could embrace quantitative easing to fight COVID-19

Emerging economies are fighting COVID-19 and the economic sudden stop imposed by the containment and lockdown policies, in the same way as advanced economies. However, emerging markets also face large and rapid capital outflows as a result of the pandemic. This column argues that credible emerging market central banks could rely on purchases of local currency government bonds to support the needed health and welfare expenditures and fiscal stimulus. In countries with flexible exchange rate regimes and well-anchored inflation expectations, such quantitative easing would help ease financial conditions, while minimising the risks of large depreciations and spiralling inflation.

By: Gianluca Benigno, Jon Hartley, Alicia García-Herrero, Alessandro Rebucci and Elina Ribakova Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: July 6, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Blog Post

Europe’s China problem: investment screening and state aid

China’s state capitalist economy poses a challenge to EU openness to foreign investment. In response, the European Commission 17 June published a White Paper on “levelling the playing field with regard to state aid”, contemplating sensible and balanced policies to protect the integrity of the European single market from subsidised foreign acquisitions. However, against the backdrop of collapsing global capital flows and limited existing FDI from China, there is little risk of excessive exposure, indeed a deepening of bilateral investment flows would be beneficial for both economies.

By: Marta Domínguez-Jiménez and Niclas Poitiers Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: July 2, 2020
Read article More by this author
 

Podcast

Podcast

One rule to ring them all? Europe's financial markets after Brexit

What effect will brexit have on Europe's financial markets?

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Global Economics & Governance Date: June 26, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Opinion

Toward a smart Indian response to China

Rather than risking its soldiers' lives on the border, India should join 'middle power' economic coalitions to address China's behavior.

By: Suman Bery and Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: June 23, 2020
Read article Download PDF
 

External Publication

European Parliament

Political Assessment of Possible Reactions of EU Main Trading Partners to EU Border Carbon Measures

This briefing was prepared for the European Parliament’s Committee on International Trade (INTA).

By: Henrik Horn and André Sapir Topic: Energy & Climate, European Macroeconomics & Governance, European Parliament, Global Economics & Governance Date: June 23, 2020
Read about event
 

Upcoming Event

Sep
1-3
09:00

Bruegel Annual Meetings 2020

The Annual Meetings are Bruegel's flagship event which gathers high-level speakers to discuss the economic topics that affect Europe and the world.

Topic: Energy & Climate, European Macroeconomics & Governance, Finance & Financial Regulation, Global Economics & Governance, Innovation & Competition Policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read article Download PDF More on this topic
 

Policy Contribution

A new policy toolkit is needed as countries exit COVID-19 lockdowns

Most governments have taken measures to protect vulnerable workers and firms from the worst effects of the sudden drop in activity related to COVID-19. But as lockdowns are lifted, the focus must shift, and governments in advanced economies must design measures that will limit the pain of adjustment.

By: Olivier Blanchard, Thomas Philippon and Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: June 22, 2020
Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

The role of the IMF in the post-COVID-19 fiscal stabilization and recovery

Fireside chat with Kristalina Georgieva, Managing Director, International Monetary Fund

Speakers: Henri de Castries, Kristalina Georgieva, Vazil Hudák, Robert Vass and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: June 15, 2020
Read article More by this author
 

Podcast

Podcast

Reopening: Europe

This episode provides a background overview of the impact of the reopening of borders on European value chains, future of work, and innovation.

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Global Economics & Governance Date: June 11, 2020
Read article More by this author
 

Podcast

Podcast

Will COVID-19 boost the euro as a global currency?

The euro is, by definition an international currency. However, since being established in the late 90s the single currency has always been somewhat less than the sum of it's parts and has yet to challenge the US dollar for global dominance. Its international status declined with the euro crisis of 2008. 

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Global Economics & Governance Date: June 8, 2020
Read article Download PDF
 

Policy Contribution

Is the COVID-19 crisis an opportunity to boost the euro as a global currency?

The euro never challenged the US dollar, and its international status declined with the euro crisis. Faced with a US administration willing to use its hegemonic currency to extend its domestic policies beyond its borders, Europe is reflecting on how to promote it currency on the global stage to ensure its autonomy. But promoting a more prominent role for the euro is difficult and involves far-reaching changes to the fabric of the monetary union.

By: Grégory Claeys and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Global Economics & Governance Date: June 5, 2020
Load more posts