Monetary
Experience of Somalia.
What
lessons we can learn from past experience
By
Mohamed Dalmar. Email:
mdalmar@sympatico.ca
In the last forty years, Somalia has had a very
sad monetary experience marked by financial chaos, currency collapse,
runaway inflation and economic ruin. The source of the problem was and
is the tendency on the part of governments leaders, of factions and
now of private businessmen to create money at will to finance their
personal, political and clan interests. The problem is the habit, now
accepted, of using the domestic currency not as a means for economic
prosperity but as a tool for political manipulation and bribery. The
problem is the lack of financial discipline, transparency and accountability.
It is no exaggeration to say that the chaotic financial situation of
the 1980s was mainly responsible for the social unrest in Somalia, the
spread of the civil war and the collapse of the Somali State. And it
is still the reason for the ongoing civil strife in the country. Conflict
arises because lack of financial accountability encourages the factions,
the interest groups, the clans, the greedy businessmen etc. to compete
for the power of creating money, and, in doing so, they plunge the country
into civil war.
In this short presentation, I will briefly review
some monetary experiences of Somalia in the last forty years. I will
consider four different periods: the 1960s or the period when the civilian
government was in power, the 1970s or the scientific socialism years,
1980s or the years of financial crisis, and finally the 1990s the civil
war period.
1. The 1960s
This period is remembered for its stable macroeconomic
environment. Inflation was very low, the shilling was strong, the economy
was free and the financial system was sound. This favorable economic
condition was possible because the government was not printing money
at discretion and was not in a position to interfere in the banking
system. In fact, The commercial banks were all foreign owned, the central
bank was headed by an expatriate, and the share of the public sector
in the economy was small. Financial stability did not, however, mean
better management of financial resources. The government run a huge
budget deficit which was covered through subsidies from Italy and Britain,
the former colonial powers. Britain terminated its subsidies in 1964
following the break up of diplomatic relations between the two countries.
Financial mismanagement arose because both the Prime Minister and the
Minister of Interior had at their disposal political funds of several
million Somali shillings allocated to them in the budget, the so called
"Capitolo buio" or the dark line item. These were substantial
funds, at that time, for which neither the Prime Minister nor the Minister
of Interior was required to account for. And they used them to buy votes,
bribe the members of parliament, appease tribal chiefs, reward supporters,
and why not, align their pockets. More funds for political manipulation
meant, of course, fewer funds for schools, for hospitals, for public
works, for basic needs etc. Moreover, the system of distributing political
funds bred corruption, neglect of public services, and vote rigging.
It is believed that this state of affairs paved the way for the military
takeover.
What lessons can we learn from this experience?
First, donors should never give cash to the government. If they do so,
they should know that they are contributing to political instability
in the country. Aid should be transparent, directed to specific developmental
projects and initiatives, and implemented with community participation
and supervision. When I say government, I mean all sorts of governments,
national, provincial, local, whether recognized by the international
community or not. Another lesson is that when the government does not
print money at discretion, or has no means to do so, the danger of a
total collapse of the economy is not present.
2. The 1970s
This is the period when heavy-handed statist interventions
and misguided socialist economic policies were in full swing. On October
1970, the Government of Somalia adopted scientific socialism. It nationalized
the banks, insurance companies, major industries and all import trade.
To carry out its nationalization policies, the government established
some 40 public enterprises, with no adequate capital, no qualified personnel
and no sound accounting and management systems. It ordered the banks,
which were under state control, to extend unlimited credit facilities
to the newly established enterprises. With loans from the banks, the
public enterprise built offices, bought furniture, imported cars and
managed to cover their losses, their inefficiencies and mismanagement.
The result was economic stagnation, huge loss of foreign reserves and
inflation repressed by price controls. Repressed inflation manifested
itself in long queues, commodity shortages, black markets, and rationing.
What can we learn from this experience? Fortunately,
the free market economy is now flourishing in every corner of Somalia,
and the spirit of entrepreneurship, characteristic to the Somalis, is
ever strong. There is no reason to fear that we will ever go back to
a public sector dominated economy. However, the danger will arise when
the government gets involved in the banking business, in the sense of
owning or controlling the banking system or parts of it. If that happens,
it will be a recipe for financial disaster.
3. The 1980s
This period saw the worst of all worlds: half hearted
liberalization policies, state monopoly in many sectors of the economy,
massive devaluations, social unrest, political repression etc. The saga
starts with the War with Ethiopia, the break up of relations with Russia,
the shift of alliance to the West and the adoption of IMF programs.
It could be argued that the government was not serious about implementing
the IMF programs and, at times, it may have concealed some facts from
the IMF. However, the one figure the government could not conceal was
the black market exchange rate. And on the basis of that indicator,
the IMF ordered massive devaluations of the Somali shilling, which fueled
the inflationary pressure, and eroded the real income of the population,
especially those on fixed income. Consider the lot of a government employee
who earned the equivalent of 100 U.S. dollar a month in 1970 just to
make the ends meet. That employee saw his or her income dramatically
reduced to less than 10 dollars by 1989.
While in the 1970s the government used the banking
system to cover the wasteful operations of the public enterprises, in
the1980s the banks were used to enrich the regime's clients. Immense
personal fortunes were attained overnight through access to banks. As
banks became more politicized, they indulged in more corruption and
irregularities and flooded the market with cash, cheques, bills, vouchers
etc. causing the worst banking history in the country. In fact, by the
end of 1989 the financial system was practically dead. It was replaced
by a multitude of small private banks that provided a wide range of
banking services.
What lessons can we learn from this experience?
One important lesson is that the process of money creation must be protected
from political pressure so as to reduce the scope for corruption and
abuse of power. For this reason I recommend the abolition of the central
bank of Somalia and the introduction of a currency board system. A currency
board is a monetary authority that issues notes and coins in exchange
for a reserve currency, example the U.S. dollar. Unlike the central
bank, the currency board cannot print money at will since it is required
to maintain foreign reserves equal in value to the total amount of notes
and coins in circulation. Also, it provides for a stable and credible
currency and, as a result, creates an environment conducive to economic
development.
4. The 1990s
A striking monetary development in this period is
the printing of banknotes by some regions, faction leaders and businessmen.
It is estimated that between 1991 and 2000, the value of printed currency
exceeded 300 billion Somali shillings. What does this mean? Well, it
is a looting by other means. It is confiscation of people's properties.
In fact, whenever a faction leader or a businessman prints fresh money
he obtains goods and services in exchange for these new pieces of paper,
e.g. he pays his militia, travels abroad to meet some dignitaries, buys
weapons, maintains his family abroad etc. The amount of goods and services
he obtains is called seignorage or profit. And that is effectively a
tax imposed by the faction leader or the businessman on the population
of Somalia, an inflation tax, or hidden tax. For example, if after the
introduction of the new money the exchange rate depreciates from 1 US$
= SoSh. 10,000 to 1US$ = So.Sh. 20,000, the difference (So.Sh. 10,000)
is an inflation tax extracted by the faction leader and the businessman
from the population, especially from the poor who cannot protect themselves.
One way to protect the public from the inflation
tax, which is generated by the faction leaders and businessmen, is to
operate in US dollars even for small transactions. Already the Somali
economy is widely dollarized. It is a matter of importing lower denomination
dollar bills & coins and carrying all transaction in dollars.
One may find the printing of money by a faction
leader scandalous and fraudulent. Actually, there is no difference between
when the previous government issued money and now that a faction leader
prints it. It was fraudulent then, as it is fraudulent now. The only
difference is this. Then, some bureaucratic formalities were performed.
For example, the notes were deposited at the Central bank, vouchers
were prepared, cheques were drawn, signatures were obtained and money
was withdrawn from the banks anyway; whereas now the notes are put in
a warehouse and distributed right away without any paperwork. The point
I would like to make is this. If money is printed at will without any
constraint and accountability, it generates extreme inflation and robs
the people of their livelihood. It does not matter who prints the notes,
a government (national, regional, and local), a faction, a warlord,
or a businessman, the effect is always the same: hyperinflation and
economic devastation. And that is why there is a need for a system that
constrains the ability of any government, faction, or group to print
money at will and thereby create inflation.
5. Conclusion.
To sum up:
- Never give cash to any government, whether regional,
local or national. Governments must not depend on foreign aid for
their day to day operations. Instead, they should build political
consensus, mobilize domestic resources and administer public funds
in an efficient, accountable and transparent way. Giving cash to a
government would amount to funding the civil war in Somalia.
- External aid should be targeted to social and
economic projects/initiatives based on the needs and priorities of
the community. Also, aid should be transparent and accountable to
the community.
- To avoid financial crisis, the government should
not own or control financial institutions. Its role should be limited
to regulatory functions.
- Do not re-establish the central bank. Instead
introduce a currency board system. The currency board is proposed
because it stops the politicization of monetary creation, limits the
scope for corruption and provides financial stability. The currency
board should be established in partnership with international financial
organizations and the Somali private sector.
- Do not rush to issue new currency. Use the US
dollar for the time being until the currency board is established.