International Eurasian Institute for Economic and Political Research

Analytic Data

To discuss on a forum >>

The banking crisis: too many questions, too many answers

Marina Pustilnik

For almost two months the crisis in the Russian banking system was more or less like a prolonged illness that wouldn't go away completely

There was a beginning, when the Central Bank of Russia recalled the license from Sodbiznesbank on May 13 and CreditTrust was forced to close its doors soon after. There was a relapse when their operations ceased Dialog-Optim, Promeximbank and Paveletsky bank. But until last week the general sense was more of dismay than of horror. It took one day to change all that - when Guta Bank (Russia's 26th largest in terms of own capital) announced problems with liquidity, and Alfa Bank (Russia's 5th largest) suffered from a rampage of clients, scared by the rumors of impending closure - it became clear to all - the illness entered the crisis stage. The crisis generally has two outcomes - either recovery or death. How did the Russian banking system get this far? Who and what is to blame for a virtual collapse? The answers are few and all of them legitimate.

It remains quite unclear what exactly brought the Russian banking system to the verge of a nervous breakdown. The media presents it as if the liquidation of Sodbiznesbank came as a surprise to the banking community. Meanwhile, in October 2003, former Interior Minister Boris Gryzlov made an announcement that Sodbiznesbank was accused of laundering 500 million rubles ($16.6 million) and that four of its managers had been placed under arrest. To a careful observer, it was obvious that it would be a matter of time before the bank faced sanctions from the Central Bank authorities. Yes, the bank's clients were careless and did not use the remaining seven months to pull out their deposits. But the banking analysts who are employed by almost any bank just had to pay more attention to such announcements so as not to be taken by surprise when the news came in May of this year.

Still, the situation around Sodbiznesbank, albeit somewhat bizarre, does not explain the scope of the problem which hit the banking community. The problem is that much harder to comprehend because in the last couple of years the Russian banking sector finally began to recover from the financial crisis of 1998. In spring 2004 the media was full of reports that Russian citizens finally regained trust in the credit institutions and began to deposit their savings in banks. The Russian banking system had never been stronger, as the events of 1998 proved to be a natural selection of the fittest, and it has finally began to serve its original purpose - crediting the industry and the consumers instead of simply stashing the clients' money in safety boxes. As the official press release by Alfa Bank's management stated, "there are no fundamental macroeconomic reasons for such a crisis".

And so, what are the answers?

Answer number one. The Central Bank of Russia once again proved that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. The authorities' plan was to pluck out a number of "bad" banks, truly guilty of money laundering. The Central Bank failed to realize, however, that even "bad" banks have a "human shield" made up of their clients. And while closing such a bank would have positive consequences for the overall "health" of the banking community, the negative repercussions could easily outweigh them. Having failed to realize the consequences of its actions, the Central Bank aggravated the situation by failing to make any clear statements addressed not to the banking community but to the banks' clients who are now the locomotive behind the escalating crisis.

Answer number two. The original situation which started as the problems of two, rather small banks, Sodbiznesbank and CreditTrust, was aggravated by the media, which, consciously or subconsciously built up the panic among regular private clients. Journalists are not the only ones to blame, as the bankers themselves, as well as government officials, such as Viktor Zubkov, head of the Financial Monitoring Service, made a number of careless remarks which contributed to the general sense of nervousness. The wave of rumors turned into a tide which overcame the banking sector with frightening ease.

Answer number three. The question of malicious intent and unfair competition should not be removed from the scales either. Back in June, trying to assuage bankers' fears, CB's Deputy Chairman Andrei Kozlov mentioned that authorities believe that the ongoing crisis is provoked by dishonesty on the part of some market participants. The latest events prove that the Central Bank may not have been mistaken. When the problems of Guta Bank surfaced last week, market observers immediately remembered that the bank had once already staved off some unnamed rivals who wanted to take control of it. What proved to be impossible then, just may be possible now. On July 7 one of Russia's largest and most stable private banks Alfa Bank also came out with the official statement that its problems were the result of premeditated attack by unscrupulous competitors, and though it failed to name them, the bank's vice president Alexander Gafin said: "We know who did this and by what means." The Central Bank also announced that an unnamed privately-owned commercial bank wants to buy Dialog-Optim, which is also suffering from a liquidity crisis. All of these events point out that the crisis may have been, at least in part, the result of unfair play.

Answer number four. The Central Bank may really be the culprit behind the whole crisis, but its fault lies not so much in a lack of action, but just the opposite. Some analysts believe that the banking crisis was orchestrated in order to bring a number of large private banks to a technical default, so that afterwards they could be bought "for a penny" by large state-owned banks, such as Foreign Trade Bank (Vneshtorgbank) or Savings Bank (Sberbank). This conspiracy theory may seem too apocalyptic to some, but as the old saying goes - "There is no smoke without fire". To prove the adepts of this theory correct, the Central Bank announced on July 7 that Guta Bank, which has almost half a million private clients, may be bought by state-owned Vneshtorgbank.

And finally, answer number five. There are absolutely no fundamental economic reasons that could have brought about the crisis. None, except one. The reason can be found in the lyrics of a song by the once-popular group Gorillaz, who sang: "...remember, it's all in your head". The Russian authorities have a long history of doing nothing when yet another crisis hits Russian society. The Central Bank has made it its official motto not to help the clients of the banks which have for one reason or another "gone under". It doesn't matter that the country is experiencing economic growth, that various international organizations are praising the level of progress made by Russia in recent years, that just a few months ago ordinary Russians were happily choosing which bank to put their money in. The crisis is in the heads of the people who have learned long ago that when push comes to shove they have nowhere to go for help. And so they rush to the banks and pull out their money "just in case" the snowball keeps rolling and will soon become an avalanche. And the Russian government is simply looking on, saying a few token words about the lack of any systemic crisis, and waiting for the Russian banking system to go into oblivion.

“Moscow News”, #26, 2004

http://english.mn.ru/english/issue.php?2004-26-2

To discuss on a forum >>

 
Institutional News / Analytic Data / Forum / Publications / Library / Guide-lines / Home /forum    

<up>   <back>