World News

Spotlight on South America, as Argentina’s deadline approaches

Spotlight on South America, as Argentina’s deadline approaches
Joseph Kim

Crossing the Pacific

The Quartz online news publication referred to South America as the new “soft power and economic battleground” for the world’s second- and third-largest economies—China and Japan, respectively—on Monday, as both Xi Jinping and Shinzo Abe crossed the Pacific Ocean this month. Chinese president Xi completed his nine-day tour last week, while Abe left Mexico for Trinidad and Tobago on Sunday, after closing deals with Mexican state oil company Pemex. The longstanding rivalry between China and Japan continues and, even though research shows that favorable views toward China have declined in Brazil and Argentina since 2011, both nations appear to be well regarded throughout the region.

Overall, the South American continent is valued by Asia as resource-rich, but both Xi and Abe have their own national agendas that are beyond monetary matters. Following many years of cheap Chinese exports to the region, President Xi spoke with a delegation of over ten Latin American and Caribbean leaders at a closed meeting in Brazil to consolidate China’s reputation, and presented his nation as an alternative to the still-dominant United States. Following the meeting, Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro represented the sentiment of the entire delegation when he expressed support for the “mutual respect between a world giant like China and Latin America.” During his junket, Xi also proposed the establishment of a US$20 billion infrastructure fund and offered member nations of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) a US$10 billion line of credit.

Meanwhile, President Abe’s ongoing tour is considered to be along diplomatic lines, as he is likely to speak about Japan’s bid for a rotating seat on the United Nations Security Council—staunchly opposed by the Chinese government—while in the Caribbean, and is expected to capitalize upon Japan’s involvement with the U.S.-led Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) to garner good will while visiting fellow TPP member nations Peru and Chile. Furthermore, Abe is prepared to sign agreements with both Brazil and Colombia in direct response to Beijing’s actions in the East and South China Seas.

Rising prices

Also this month, the Swiss-based financial services corporation Credit Suisse reported the increase of its 2014 inflation forecasts for all South American countries except Argentina, explaining that “the impact of those price pressures on rates should be palpable.” In its July 22 announcement, Credit Suisse referred to the examples of Colombia, Peru and Chile, citing “accelerating” inflation as the issue. Additionally, Credit Suisse increased its 2015 inflation forecast for Latin America by a half-point to 9.3 percent.

Eighth time for Argentina?

Although it observed a thriving metropolitan economy in the Argentinian capital of Buenos Aires, London’s Economist publication still considered the possibility of Latin America’s third-largest economy defaulting for the eighth time on a payment to U.S. hedge fund NML Capital that is due on July 30. Following a ruling by a U.S. district court judge in 2012, after NML Capital litigated for payment of the full principal plus interest, Argentina has struggled with a set of limited choices, as the southeastern nation’s overall debt is also pertinent.

Argentina’s current quandary can be traced back to 2001, when NML became involved after Argentina defaulted on US$95 billion of external debt that year—the hedge fund gained what the Economist calls “cheap debt.” As Argentina attempted to rectify its economic situation over subsequent years, it exchanged 93 percent of defaulted debt for performing securities in 2005, and again in 2010. Argentina’s president, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, and government are opposed to the NML’s demand for full payment, and have cited the self-imposed Rights Upon Future Offers (RUFO) clause that forms part of its restructured bonds arrangement as a foremost part of its reasoning. Argentina explained that it risks an influx of other bondholder claims if it pays NML the US$1.3 billion with interest.

In what has become an increasingly complicated situation, Argentina is currently negotiating both bondholders and holdout creditors, as Judge Thomas Griesa’s deadline looms overhead. If Argentina misses the July 30 deadline, it will be in a position known as a “soft default,” as legal issues have impeded payment rather than an inability to pay. If Argentina defaults, it will not regain access to the international dollar-bond markets, which was removed 13 years ago, and, for this reason, Credit Suisse researcher Casey Reckman believes that “it makes more sense for Argentina to negotiate a settlement.” Of particular concern to Argentina is its diminishing foreign reserves—recently worth US$29 billion—and Credit Suisse stated on July 18 that the “best-case scenario” involves Argentina paying off as much debt as possible through the issuance of new bonds so that the reserves remain untouched.

As Japan’s president continues his diplomatic trip through South America—while China’s leader prepares to follow through with a set of expensive commitments—the world does not have long to wait for Argentina’s critical decision.

 

Comment Below
  • David Smith

    “WELL, YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWN”.
    – U.S. President George H.W. Bush reneging on the arrangements between
    corporate America & corporate Canada; NAFTA.

    TRANS PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP (TPP), C-CITreaty, CETAgreement, et al, NEXT?

    …One of the things that the 95% – 99% of Canadians who make up the grassroots of Canada & who can not afford to be shareholders of corporate Canada in the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), etc., & the other non shareholding citizens of the potential signatories of the TPP, such as Australia, might consider remembering is a remark by former U.S. president George H.W. Bush regarding the arrangements between corporate America & corporate Canada in the NAFTAgreement,
    &
    that is:
    “Well, you should have known”.

    Did he mean that the Canadian politicians, &/or, the members of corporate Canada that Bush was dealing with should have asked him (Bush) if all of the relevant contingencies had been discussed, understood & agreed upon, including dispute mechanisms & escrow accounts, funded by corporate Canada & corporate America, set up to cover the costs of adjudicating any dispute resolutions and
    to pay for any punitive penalties, &/or, damages prior to finalizing any deals, arrangements, treaties, agreements, et al.

    Or, did President Bush mean that the aforementioned Canadians representatives did do their due diligence & it was the Canadian representatives who should
    have told the aforementioned 95% – 99% of the grassroots Canadians that the above due diligence procedures were in place, but, the grassroots Canadians have to pay the costs of procedures & penalties because they, the grassroots
    Canadians, had not thought to inquire that the procedures were in fact “in
    place”, & thereby, ensure that the aforementioned procedures, etc. would ensure that the either, corporate Canada, or, corporate America would pay for both; the penalties & the procedures.

    Or, should the grassroots of Canada have known that corporate America had no intention of honoring parts of the treaty right from the start, but the US- Canada
    Agreement (NAFTA) was quickly ratified with suggestions that any deficiencies, or,
    forget-me-nots , etc. to the agreement would be amicably settled on a on going basis?

    Therefore, when it comes to any present arrangement, treaty, &/or, agreement that may have anything to do with corporate American, such as; the TPPartnership, law enforcement, etc., we now know better, but, now, do not ask, or,
    insist that the enforceable procedures, penalties, escrow funding from corporates Canada & corporate America, et al, be agreed upon by the grassroots Canada in a series of plebiscites prior to proceeding any further?

    And, if corporate Canada fails to provide the plebiscites, et al, when will the grassroots be enabled to sue both of the corporate Canada's escrow accounts which corporate Canada will have to set aside the funds for the grassroots
    legal funds as a prerequisite (ie. to investigate & prosecute…

    …For the FULL ARTICLE, see;
    Google: “WELL, YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWN” David E.H. Smith”
    &
    Facebook;
    “David Smith, Sidney, BC” to the access List of RECENT ARTICLES & CORRESPONDENCES by DEHS.

    Also see;
    “CHINA to PROTECT Most Vulnerable (95% -99%) Aboriginal, ACTIVIST Canadians from Bullying “DEATH-POTS” Deal to SUPERSEDE corporate Canada's INSIDER TRADING pending TRADE DEALS; Paves way to SUE corporate Canada, corporate TPP signatories for The WAD ACCORD’s COMPENSATION?”.

World News

More in World News

Asean

ASEAN Summit 2017 in Manila Welcomes World Leaders

Bernadine RacomaNovember 13, 2017
piccadilly

New Piccadilly Mono-Screen Can Target You With Custom Ads

Brian OasterOctober 17, 2017
iran deal

Will Trump Scrap the Iran Deal?

Camilo AtkinsonOctober 11, 2017
facial recognition

China Expands Use of Facial Recognition Technology

Brian OasterOctober 5, 2017
Cuba

Department of State Expels 15 Cuban Diplomats from Washington DC

Camilo AtkinsonOctober 4, 2017
kumari

Nepal Finds its New Living Goddess, a 3 Year Old Girl

Brian OasterSeptember 28, 2017
Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia Will Allow Women to Drive by June 2018

Camilo AtkinsonSeptember 27, 2017
Rohingya Women

Rohingya Crisis: Help for Pregnant And Lactating Women

Christina CombenSeptember 26, 2017
Puerto Rico Damage

Puerto Rico Still Cut off from the World after Hurricane Maria

Bernadine RacomaSeptember 25, 2017