The success of the pending rescue of the U.S. financial system probably depends as much on the central banks of China and the Middle East as on the U.S. Congress and Federal Reserve.
The U.S. is turning to foreign governments and other overseas investors to buy a good chunk of the as much as $700 billion in Treasury debt that would be sold to finance the bailout. Foreign investors are also needed to shore up the depleted capital of the nation's financial institutions, as evidenced by the plan of Japan's Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group to buy a large stake in Morgan Stanley, which is weighed down by bad debt and market distrust.
This is a bittersweet moment in U.S. economic history. In one sense, the growing importance of foreign cash represents the triumph of a half-century of U.S. proselytizing for a global financial system in which money flows from those who have it to those who need it, regardless of borders. But it is also an unmistakable sign of U.S. economic decline. The global financial system the U.S. designed anticipated that American banks and financial firms would be the world's financial lifeguards; now those institutions are like exhausted swimmers a stroke or two away from drowning.
The financial crisis makes clear how much the interests of foreign lenders have become a top concern in Washington. A big reason the Fed and Treasury stepped in to rescue mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, say U.S. financial officials, was to reassure China, which holds roughly $1 trillion in U.S. debt, that U.S. securities were safe. 'Superpowers do not normally ask their diplomats to reassure other nations on questions of creditworthiness,' says former U.S. Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers.
Just 10 years after the U.S. oversaw the financial rescue of Asian nations, the U.S. now risks becoming the world's largest subprime borrower. This change of fortune has been hard to swallow politically. In his televised address Thursday, President George W. Bush blamed the current financial crisis on the 'massive amount of money [that] flowed into the United States from investors abroad,' rather than on greedy decisions by U.S. mortgage lenders and borrowers. In Friday's presidential debate, both candidates railed against U.S. economic dependence on China.
Powerful nations have been humbled before by an overdependence on foreign capital. Council on Foreign Relations economist Brad Setser notes that Britain was forced to end its seizure of the Suez Canal in 1956 because of U.S. opposition. Washington's main weapon: its threat to slash financial support for London, whose economy had been battered by World War II.
The U.S. isn't in remotely as bad shape as postwar Britain. It still is the world's sole military superpower, and the U.S. currency is still dominant. The latter is important because even if foreign holdings of U.S. debt grow, as is likely, the U.S. alone prints the dollars needed to pay those debts.
Even so, foreign lenders have a great deal of sway. If they were to dump U.S. government debt -- or be unwilling to buy more -- the interest rates needed to attract buyers of Treasurys would soar. The already fragile U.S. economy would absorb yet another hit.
China, Saudi Arabia and other big foreign holders are unlikely to take antidollar measures precisely because they own so much U.S. debt. To the extent the dollar declines, so does the value of those nations' holdings. Mr. Summers calls this situation 'the financial balance of terror.'
But it is naive to assume that this 'balance' will protect U.S. interests indefinitely. Senior Chinese economists have voiced growing dismay about the outlook for the dollar, and the introduction of an additional $700 billion in debt might drive the currency's value down further, at least in the short term. 'I think foreigners are being taken for a ride by the U.S. government,' says Andy Xie, an independent economist in Shanghai.
Sovereign-wealth funds -- huge government investment funds -- have largely sat on their hands rather than buy additional stakes in U.S. financial firms. China Investment Corp., for instance, has been wary of increasing its investment in Morgan Stanley after it was criticized sharply at home for taking equity stakes in U.S. financial companies that have nose-dived.
In the Middle East, too, state investment funds in Kuwait, Qatar and Abu Dhabi say they have no plans to jump to the rescue of ailing Wall Street banks. In one hopeful sign for the U.S., some smaller state funds are looking for bargains in real estate, finance and insurance. 'For investors that have the liquidity and have patient capital, I can see good opportunities,' said Talal Al-Zain, chief executive of Bahrain's $10 billion fund, Mumtalakat.
The U.S. economy has managed to grow in recent years, even though Americans don't save much and the government has run huge deficits, because foreigners kept lending. The same was true in the 1980s. Now the U.S. needs foreign capitals to keep lending. Fred Bergsten, director of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a Washington think tank, says the Treasury will have to stage a 'road show' to explain the rescue plan to overseas lenders who may be considering euro investments instead.
Domestically, the reliance on foreign money means a loss of policy autonomy that Americans are simply going to have to get used to. Part of the accommodation is already occurring. The controversy over investments by sovereign-wealth funds has been reversed. Last year, lawmakers worried that the funds would gain political influence by investments in U.S. companies; now U.S. policy makers are worried that they won't buy new stakes. Efforts to erect restrictions against foreign trade may also lose momentum. The U.S. needs the world's money more than it thought it would and won't want to rile potential lenders.
---------
美国现在正巴望着外国政府和海外投资者能购买规模高达7000亿美元的国债，以此为救助计划提供资金。海外投资者还需要对严重缺乏资金的美国金融机构加以支持，正如日本三菱UFJ金融集团(MUFG)收购摩根士丹利(Morgan Stanley)大笔股权那样，眼下后者正承受着坏帐以及市场不信任之苦。
纵观美国的经济史，当前可谓一个悲喜交加的时刻。一方面，外资重要性的增强宣告了美国的胜利──美国在长达半个世纪的时间里主张塑造一个能冲破国界藩篱、保证资本从所有国流向需求国的全球金融系统的努力终告成功；而另一方面，这也是一个明确无误的信号──美国经济正在走向衰败。由美国设计的全球金融系统原本预计美国的银行以及金融机构会成为世界金融系统的守卫者，而现在，这些机构更像一群精疲力尽、偶尔扑腾两下以免溺毙的游泳者。
此次金融危机清楚地表明外国债权人的利益在华府心目中已跃升为头等大事。美国金融界官员表示，Fed和财政部决定出手救助抵押贷款巨头房利美(Fannie Mae)和房地美(Freddie Mac)的一个重要原因就是为了安慰持有近1万亿美国国债的中国，表明美国证券是安全的。美国前财长劳伦斯•萨默斯(Lawrence Summers)说，大国通常不会要求自己的外交官就自己的信誉度问题安抚其他国家。
仅仅在十年前，美国还负责监督对亚洲金融危机受害国的救助，而今自己就可能沦落为全球最大的次级债借贷国。如此命运转折自然为政界所难容。美国总统布什在上周四的一次电视讲话中称当前金融危机的罪魁祸首是海外投资者投入美国的大量资金、而非美国抵押贷款放贷人及借贷人的贪婪决定。在上周五的总统候选人辩论中，两党提名人均将枪口对准了美国在经济上对中国的依赖。
历史上，超级大国也曾因对海外资本的过度依赖而低下头。美国外交关系委员会(Council on Foreign Relations)经济学家布拉德•塞瑟尔(Brad Setser)指出，由于美国反对，英国被迫于1956年归还了苏伊士运河(Suez Canal)的控制权。当时美国手中主要的武器就是威胁削减对英国的资金支持，而二战结束后英国的经济已是百孔千疮。
目前美国的经济状况还不至于象战后的英国那么遭。美国仍是当今世界唯一的军事超级大国，美元仍是主要货币。后者之所以重要是因为即便外国对美国国债的持有量大增（目前看很有可能这样），美国只需印制还债的美钞即可。
可是就算这样，海外债主仍能施加重大影响。如果它们大举抛售美国国债、或不愿继续买入，那么用以吸引买家的国债收益率将大幅上扬。这将令本已脆弱的美国经济雪上加霜。
中国、沙特以及美国国债的其他海外大债主不太可能采取打压美元的政策，因为它们毕竟手中握有大量美国国债。美元跌得有多狠，它们的资产资产就缩水得有多厉害。萨默斯将这种状况形容为“金融业的恐怖制衡”。
不过，认为这种平衡会永远地保卫美国的利益未免天真。中国高级经济学家均谈到了美元愈显黯淡的前景，并指出7000亿美元国债的推出至少会在短期内进一步压低美元汇率。上海经济学家谢国忠(Andy Xie)说，我认为外国投资者是被迫上了美国政府的贼船了。
目前，监管着巨额政府投资资金的主权财富基金基本上是持观望态度，而没有追加对美国金融机构的持股量。举例来说，中投公司(China Investment Corp.)就在增加对摩根士丹利投资一事上分外小心，因为此前它投资的美国金融机构股价出现了大幅跳水，中投因此在国内遭到了猛批。
在中东，情况亦是如此。科威特、卡特尔以及阿布扎比的主权财富基金均表示无意挺身而出营救华尔街投行。令美国看到一线曙光的是一些规模不大的主权财富基金目前正在寻求对美国的地产、金融以及保险业资产进行逢低吸纳。巴林主权财富基金Mumtalakat的首席执行长塔拉尔•阿尔赞恩(Talal Al-Zain)说，对那些持有现金和耐心资本的投资者来说，我看到了投资良机。Mumtalakat管理着100亿美元的资产。
虽然美国人储蓄水平不高、政府背负着庞大赤字，但在外国投资者持续提供资金的情况下，过去几年中美国经济仍实现了增长，这和上世纪80年代时的情况如出一辙。现在美国需要外国资本继续“输血”。华盛顿智库彼得森国际经济研究所(Peterson Institute for International Economics)负责人弗莱德•博格斯坦(Fred Bergsten)说，财政部必须进行“路演”，来向或许正考虑转投欧元资产的海外贷款人解释政府的救助计划。
在美国国内。对外资的依赖意味着美国政治自主权的丧失，而美国人唯有学会适应它。这样的妥协在一定程度上已经发生了。和过去相比，围绕着主权财富基金的讨论已经掉转了船头。去年，议员们担心的这些主权基金会通过对美投资获取政治影响力，而今议员们担心的则是它们不肯再掏钱怎么办。那些旨在建立外贸屏障的努力可能也将丧失动能。美国对外资的渴求程度是它始料未及的，而且美国也不愿惹恼这些潜在“财神”。
--------http://chinese.wsj.com/gb/20080929/fea130118.asp?source=mostpopular1
