Thursday, 1 April 2021

OPEC plus decision to ease production dictated by United States

On Thursday, OPEC plus once again succumbed to pressure from the United States to gradually ease its oil output cuts from May. This should not be a surprise for the world because the Biden administration did exactly what Donald Trump had been doing in the past. 

Just to recall, it was Trump’s practice to call OPEC leaders, particularly Saudi Arabia to keep energy affordable.

The group, which has implemented deep cuts since a pandemic-induced oil price collapse in 2020, agreed to ease production curbs by 350,000 barrels per day (bpd) in May, another 350,000 bpd in June and further 400,000 bpd or so in July.

Under Thursday’s deal, cuts implemented by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, Russia and their allies, a group known as OPEC plus, would be just above 6.5 million bpd from May, compared with slightly below 7 million bpd in April.

“What we did today is, I think, a very conservative measure,” Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz Bin Salman told a news conference after the OPEC plus meeting, adding that output levels could still be adjusted at the next meeting on April 28.

He said Thursday’s decision had not been influenced by any talks with US officials or any other consuming nations.

The Saudi minister also said the kingdom would gradually phase out its additional voluntary cut that have been running at one million bpd, by adding 250,000 bpd to production in May, another 350,000 bpd in June and then 400,000 bpd in July.

“We reaffirmed the importance of international cooperation to ensure affordable and reliable sources of energy for consumers,” Jennifer Granholm, the new energy secretary appointed by US President Joe Biden, said on Twitter after her call with the Saudi energy minister.

News of the call coincided with signs of a changing mood in informal discussions between OPEC plus members. A few days before Thursday’s talks, delegates had said the group would likely keep most existing cuts in place, given uncertainty about the demand outlook amid a new wave of coronavirus lockdowns.

But in the 24 hours before the meeting started, sources said discussions had shifted to the possibility of output increases.

In the past, Trump had used his influence to force Saudi Arabia to adjust policy. When prices spiked, he insisted OPEC raise production. When oil prices collapsed last year, hurting US shale producers, he called on the group to cut output.

Until this week, Biden’s administration had refrained from such an approach, keep a distance from Riyadh and imposing sanctions on some Saudi citizens over the 2018 murder of Jamal Khashoggi.

Even when OPEC plus decided on 4th March to keep output steady, triggering a price rise, the White House had made no direct comment.

Biden administration considers West Bank occupied territory, says Ned Price

Biden administration clarified that it considers the West Bank to be occupied territory, but ducked a question as to whether it held that settlements were illegal. "It is a historical fact that Israel occupied the West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan Heights in the 1967 War," US State Department spokesman Ned Price told reporters in Washington on Wednesday.

The issue was raised after the Biden administration published on Tuesday the 2020 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. It is the first of the annual reports released since US President Joe Biden took office in January 2021. The report affirmed steps taken by the previous Trump administration, which had both recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital and Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights.

It also kept in place a description change made to the report by former US president Donald Trump, in which he replaced the phrase "Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories" with "Israel, West Bank and Gaza."

But within the report, the Biden administration reintroduced the word "occupied" to describe Israel's seizure of territory during the 1967 Six Day War. 

When questioned by a reporter as to whether the US considered that Israel occupied the West Bank, Price affirmed that it did.

"In fact, the 2020 Human Rights Report does use the term 'occupation' in the context of the current status of the West Bank," Price said. "This has been the longstanding position of previous administrations of both parties over the course of many decades."

Israel has long argued that the West Bank does not meet the standard of occupied territory, because it captured the area from Jordan, whose sovereignty there from 1948-1967 was not recognized legally and which itself was considered to be occupying it.

Prior to the 1948 War of Independence, the territory was held by Great Britain; prior World War I, it was part of the Ottoman Empire.

The Trump administration believed that Israel had historic and religious rights to portions of that territory and did not refer to it as occupied. Its top officials agreed with the Israeli Right, that the proper term was Judea and Samaria and not the West Bank, terminology linked to the time when the territory was under Jordanian rule.

Trump also changed US policy toward Israeli West Bank settlements. It rejected a 1978 memo by then US State Department legal advisor Herbert J. Hansell declaring that the settlements were illegal, declaring instead that they were not inconsistent with Israeli law.

The United Nations holds that Israel's settlements are illegal and that the West Bank is occupied Palestinian territory.

The Biden administration has yet to clarify its stance on the settlements, even though it is presumed to support a two-state solution at the pre-1967 lines.

At Wednesday's press conference, a reporter asked Price, "Does the US consider, for example, Israeli settlements in the occupied territories to be illegal as a result of this stance?"

Price responded that the US position had not changed, but he clarified that stance in his own way.

"We – as you have heard me say before – we continue to encourage all sides to avoid actions – both sides, I should say – to avoid actions that would put the two-state solution further out of reach. 

"Again, our ultimate goal here is to facilitate – to help bring about – a two-state solution because it is the best path to preserve Israel’s identity as a Jewish and democratic state while bestowing on the Palestinians their legitimate aspirations of sovereignty and dignity in a state of their own," he said.

These lines are often his and other Biden official's standard response to many questions about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Pakistan Stock Exchange remains under pressure during March 2021

Weak market sentiments at the end of result season were further dampened by political ambiguities (senate elections, changes in cabinet). As a result, benchmark index of Pakistan Stock Exchange (PSX) closed March 2021 on a negative note, down 2.8%MoM to close at 44,588 points.

Even improving external account position (rupee appreciation, IMF disbursement of US$500 million, successful issuance of Eurobond) failed to lift the sentiments. Average volume declined to 598.3 million shares as compared to previous two-month average of 772.4 million shares and 8MFY21 average of 624.4 million shares. Average traded value was in line with previous two-month average of Rs36 billion, signaling shift to top tier stocks.

Amongst major sectors, OMCs and Chemicals were the leaders with a gain of 2.8%MoM and 2.4%MoM respectively. Performance of OMCs was linked to margin expansion (EPCL margins up 36.7%CYTD whereas that of LOTCHEM was up 54.2%CYTD). Textile composites experienced the heaviest decline, down 11.2%MoM. All-Sector chart was topped by Glass & Ceramics with a gain of 22.5%MoM followed by Leather & Tanneries +17.8%MoM, while Cable & Electrical goods were the laggards, down 11.5%MoM.

Flow wise foreigners remained net seller with net disposal of US$8.47 million in March 2021, taking CYTD net to US$16.5 million. However, selective foreign buying was witnessed in the latter part of the month in the wake of rupee appreciation. Mutual Funds and Companies also emerged net seller with US$16.9 million and US$10.7 million respectively which was absorbed mainly by Insurance and Individuals with net buy of US$15.8 million and US$11.1 million respectively. Excluding last day’s net buy of US$7.41 million, individual’s net buy during the month under review was reported at US$3.7 million as compared to 12-month net buy of US$26 million indicating anchoring role of individual participants to have subdued in the recent month.

With political frenzy in the background, attention in April 2021 is likely to be centered on four key inputs: 1) corporate earnings, 2) economic data points, 3) interest rates, and 4) budgetary measures in the near term. Earnings are likely to continue their strong run for the quarter ended on 31st March 2021, following rupee appreciation (up 4.3%QoQ), and raw material inventory built up by manufacturing players (evident from Rs189 billion increase in working capital loans in last quarter of CY20) countering pressure from bull-cycle in global commodities (+11.0%QoQ) on 1QCY21 input costs.

On the flip side, increasing inflationary pressures could boost expectation of interest rate hikes snowballed by potentially tough budgetary measures where Government of Pakistan has already agreed Rs6 trillion FBR target with IMF for FY22 as against Rs4.7 trillion for FY21, which could keep market range-bound in the coming months.

That said, Pakistan’s long term growth story remains intact with additional support coming from robust external account position and improving prospects of trade with India. Analysts continue to like Cements, Steel and other Construction and allied sectors. Their top picks include LUCK, MLCF, DGKC, and MUGHAL. They also like Chemicals (on margin expansion) and Autos (rupee appreciation and strong demand).

Wednesday, 31 March 2021

Cold war is still going on, though of another type

According to many analysts, 20th century ended with a unipolar world. The United States developed the complacency it had eliminated its enemies, but the start of the 21st century proved it wrong and the cold war is still going on.

The fight against communism might be over, but the communist countries from the east began to respond to the US, in their own way. Two leaders from the east, Putin and Xi Jinping are constantly challenging the US hegemony through proxies, trade and diplomacy.

Although, the main US enemy during the cold war was Russia, one more was added to the list in the new cold war, China. The dawn of the 21st century brought rising China.

Its military might and economic progress posed a threat to US dominance. China began to capture the world through trade and investment. It caused the US, to take some unconventional steps against China. The US imposed economic sanctions on China and China responded accordingly. Hence, the trade war started.

The US also shifted its Asia Pacific policy to Indo-Pacific. The initiative New Silk Road, the establishment of Quad, more military presence in the South China Sea, military assistance to Taiwan, and support for Hong Kong are some manifestations of the new cold war.

Rising Russia

Putin strengthened the disintegrated Russia, which gave birth to the new phase of the cold war, and also made Russia stronger to give a befitting response to the US at every front.

Putin with political acumen and strong nerves has brought Russia to the level to compete with the US at the international chessboard more firmly and robustly.

In 2015, Russia launched airstrikes in Syria to back Bashar Al-Assad, the US was too keen to topple. Failed Trump had to announce the withdrawal of troops from Syria. Subsequently, Russia won Asad, the ruler of an important country in the Middle East.

Furthermore, Russia’s meddling in the US 2016 elections which boosted Trump candidacy, proved Putin a great strategist. Trump’s policies ‑ withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord, cancellation of Iran nuclear deal, Mexico border wall, a travel ban on some Muslim countries, recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel etc. brought criticism to the US.

By bringing Trump into power, Russia succeeded in minimizing its enemy’s role in international politics and tarnishing its image at an international forum.

Russia and China also enjoy good relations with Iran. Both Russia and Iran are also major allies in Syria, a country that was once America’s ally. Closer to home, Russia is also trying to play its card in the Afghanistan conflict.

The US had to invite Russia to arrange the Moscow conference, which was arranged on 20th March, to bring peace to Afghanistan. After fighting the longest war, the US is defeated and facing humiliation, because of Russia’s support to Taliban. Now Russia would surely win an important stake in Afghanistan’s political leadership.

Falling United States

Moreover, Turkey has also gone from the US hands. The US sanctions over Turkey against buying the S-400 missiles system from Russia have brought the relations between former allies to a historic low.

Turkey, under Erdogan, chose to preserve its sovereignty by pursuing an independent policy. Hence, the country, which once allowed the US to deploy nuclear weapons against USSR now has warm relations with Russia and is no more on Uncle Sam’s payroll.

In Latin America waves of the cold war were also seen following the Venezuela crisis. The US has thrown its support behind Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido and declared him the interim president while Russia sent two military planes carrying about 100 Russian personnel arrived in Caracas in the support of President Maduro.

The US officials have told CBS News that the influx was unusual for its size, has fuelled tensions between Russia and the United States as China was also supporting Maduro. Hence, the 21st century has ignited the cold war between Russia and United with new a new vigor.

It was thought that Biden, the seasoned politician, who was known for his support to democratic values, would not put through the world into an abyss of another cold war, but his first foreign policy speech proved it wrong.

Tuesday, 30 March 2021

China building iron ore hub in Africa

It seems Chinese state planners have realized their glaring vulnerability, high dependence on iron ore from Australia. Perhaps that is why China is looking at an impoverished but mineral rich country in West Africa, Guinea, as the potential partner that would free it from the dependence on Australia, which has turned a foe after joining Quad.

Guinea sits atop the world's largest reserve of untapped high-quality iron ore. Surely it is no coincidence, then, that on 4th March 2021, the first batch of China-donated COVID-19 vaccines arrived in Guinea, one of the first nations to receive the Chinese gift. 

The change in Chinese strategy can be best understood by reading two briefs. The stock market turmoil linked to US investment firm Archegos Capital Management appears to have hit Japan's biggest financial player, Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group. Its security unit said it faces a potential loss estimated at $300 million at a European unit.

In worrying news for Apple, its partner and top iPhone assembler Foxconn said that the global chip shortage will cut its shipments by 10% a rare acknowledgment that shows some of the world's biggest consumer names might face headwinds from the supply crunch rocking the tech industry.

Further clarity can be obtained by a quick review of rise and fall of Japan.
 
"No other nation at the present time is spending so large a part of its revenue on naval preparations," military author Hector Bywater wrote in the 1921 book "Sea-Power in the Pacific." But Japan had a critical weakness: lack of steel. Japan's ambition to become the dominant Pacific naval power was brought to a standstill when the US imposed a steel embargo in 1917.
  

Courtesy: Nikkei Asia

It is not an appropriate time for Pakistan to issue US$ denominated Eurobonds

There are reports that Pakistan is getting ready to issue US$ denominated Eurobonds of more than US$2 billion over the next few days. The settlement date for the issue is likely to be 6th April 2021. However, some analysts are of the view that it is not an appropriate time to go for this adventure.

Initial indications suggest that 5-year bond’s bids to be between 6.0-6.5%, 10-year bond’s between 7.2-7.7%. Interestingly, Pakistan is also trying to sell Eurobonds having a tenor of 30 years at a yield of close to 8.5-9.0%.

They say, currently US$ exchange parity is on the slide and further erosion in value is anticipated as Ramadan gets closer. They anticipate an influx of more than US$2.5 billion over the next 30 days, which may push the parity below Rs148.

They go to the extent of saying that Pakistan should capitalize this opportunity, as no interest payment will be required. The want State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) to work out a band, in which parity should be allowed to move. The central bank should start buying when parity goes below the threshold point or start selling which parity crosses upper limit.

They believe the central bank has ample supply of local currency in its coffer and in the worst scenario can print more. In this scenario the biggest collateral will of the added foreign exchange reserves.

Currently, Pakistan’s US$ denominated bond yields around 5.9% (having maturity in 2027) in the secondary market. The average yield over the last 3-months for the same is around 5.8%.

We believe this re-entry of Pakistan in international capital markets will support investors’ sentiments. Regardless of the yield, the size of these bonds will provide much needed support to Pakistan foreign exchange reserves that are currently adequate for 3 months of import only.

S&P and Moody’s presently rate Pakistan as B- with stable outlook and B3 with stable outlook.

Recently Egypt having S&P rating of B and Moody’s rating of B2 (one notch above Pakistan), raised US$3.75 billion. Egypt sold 5-year worth US$750 million at 3.875%, 10-year bonds worth at US$1.5 billion at 5.875% and 40-year bonds worth US$1.5 billion at 7.5%.

Pakistan Rupee (PKR) vis-à-vis US$ has climbed to a 22-month high, gaining around 3% during the last month and 9% from its bottom touched on 20th July 2020.

Pakistan floated its first bond in international market during 1994 and then in 1997.

The first bond was launched on Dec 22, 1994 at 11.5% with amount raised being US$150 million. This was followed by US$160 million and US$300 million bond in Feb-May, 1997 at 6% and Libor + 395bps, respectively.

Later due to international restriction after nuclear testing Pakistan was unable to tap international market. However, Pakistan reverted back to international market in 2004 as better macroeconomic indicators resulted in improved ratings.

In FY05, Pakistan issued 5-year Eurobond and raised US$500 million at rate of 6.75%.

In FY06, Pakistan issued US$600mn in 5-year Sukuk issuance at rental rate of 6M LIBOR plus 220bps.

In FY07, Pakistan issued total US$800 million by issuing two Eurobonds of worth US$500 million (7.125%, 10 year) and US$300 million (7.875%, 30 year) each.

After gap of 7 years, Pakistan mobilized US$2 billion in April 2014 by issuing 5 and 10 year bonds at 7.25% and 8.25%, respectively.

In November 2014, Pakistan issued Sukuk of US$1 billion (already matured in December 2019) at 6.75%.

In September 2015, Pakistan issued 5-year Eurobond of US$500 million at 8.25%. In Oct-2016, Pakistan issued 5 year Sukuk of US$1 billion at a lowest rate of 5.5%.

In last issue of November 2017, Pakistan raised US$2.5 billion by offering 5-year Sukuk of US$1 billion and 10-year Eurobond of US$1.5 billion at 5.625% and 6.875%, respectively. 

Monday, 29 March 2021

Bangladesh: A role model for developing countries

Poverty, hunger, natural disasters, famine, crumbling infrastructure, political turmoil, and coups in the first decade after the creation of Bangladesh did not paint a picture that would radiate hope. Today, as the country celebrates Golden Jubilee of Independence, Bangladesh has not only stood on its own feet, but has also become a role model for development.

In the beginning, Bangladesh was branded as a basket case. The naysayers believed that country would have to be fed by the international community as it was staring at failure with no mineral resources, high population growth, food shortage, and negligible exports.

The situation was so bad that in 1976, Just Faaland, resident representative of the World Bank in Bangladesh (1972-1974), and Prof Jack R Parkinson, senior economist to the World Bank Mission summed up Bangladesh’s trauma in the phrase “test case for development”. They argued, “If development could be made successful in Bangladesh, there can be little doubt that it could be made to succeed anywhere else.”

Bangladesh turnaround story is worth reading. The country brought down the population growth rate from over 3 percent to a little over one percent. The poverty rate had fallen to less than 20 percent before the pandemic from as high as 82 percent in the 1970s.

The country struggling to feed its 75 million people five decades ago is self-sufficient in food production even though the population has more than doubled.

Aid-dependence significantly declined from 14 percent of the GDP in the 70s to less than 1.5 percent now.

Life expectancy is 72 years, much higher than neighbouring Pakistan and India.

People can now send their children to schools and access primary health care.

With policy support of the government, Bangladesh has become a key supplier of readymade garments worldwide. Major brands of the world have their products made here. This industry alone brings in about US$34 billion a year and employs millions, women being the largest workforce in the industry.

Another key driver of the economy is manpower export. Around 10 million Bangladeshis are working abroad and earning foreign exchange for the country and bringing comfort to near and dear.

They send in around US$15 billion every year and that amount is ever increasing. This allowed Bangladesh to have a huge foreign currency reserve.

More than ten million people took shelter in India in 1971. Now Bangladesh, with its economic might, is able to open its doors to nearly a million Rohingyas escaping persecution in Myanmar.

Bangladesh has met all three conditions for graduating from the grouping of the least-developed countries twice. The United Nations Committee for Development Policy has already recommended the country’s graduation in 2026.

Bangladesh’s economy was one of the few economies that posted positive growth in 2020 when growth went south for most because of the pandemic.

The secret of Bangladesh’s success was its education and girls, as American journalist and political commentator Nicholas Kristof put it. “Bangladesh invested in its most underutilized assets — its poor, with a focus on the most marginalized and least productive, because that’s where the highest returns would be.”

Ahsan Mansur, Executive Director of the Policy Research Institute of Bangladesh, said the central bank did not have a machine to print money after independence. The geopolitical situation was not in favour of Bangladesh as the new country was aligned with the left-leaning bloc.

Since the severe famine of 1974, Bangladesh has not faced any major food crisis, greatly aided by the green revolution that was sweeping across the world at the time. “This has been a major achievement,” he said.

A major paradigm shift was moving away from a nationalized economic policy stance perceived in the 1970s to a private-sector-led economy with liberalization, deregulation and denationalization in the 80s and 90s, according to Manzur Hossain, Research Director of the Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS).

“Bangladesh has disproved all predictions and progressed at a good pace,” said AB Mirza Azizul Islam, a former bureaucrat and Finance Adviser of the government.

Muhammad Abdul Mazid, a former Chairman of the National Board of Revenue, said all governments took note of the importance of the agriculture sector to feed the growing population amid shrinking land. The sector gave the much-needed resilience to the economy.

“Our people are resilient and proactive in driving the economy forward. And they have been supported by appropriate policies,” said Prof Shamsul Alam, member of the General Economics Division under the Planning Commission.

Zaid Bakht, a former Research Director of the BIDS, credited public expenditure and investment for the surprising turnaround. “All countries do this, but ours was more focused and intense. Governments have given emphasis on rural infrastructural development. This has a tremendous impact on the economy.” There has been economic diversification. Cropping intensity has been increased. Non-farm activities have gone up, he added.

He said microcredit organizations and NGOs have worked in empowering women. Governments set up roads and bridges, kept the labour market flexible, gave mobility and education to women and girls, and made some improvements in the health sector. “All these created a virtuous cycle,” Bakht said.

Zahid Hussain, a former lead economist of the World Bank’s Dhaka Office, gave credit to the steady economic growth, social policies aimed at population control, rural roads, education and electrification, primary education, female education, local low-cost health solutions for immunization and communicable diseases, access to finance through microcredit, last-mile service delivery by NGOs, and demographic dividend for the turnaround of the country.

The latest testimony to Bangladesh’s astounding achievement came when Nicholas Kristof advised US President Joe Biden to look to Bangladesh to find the answer to how to bring down the rate of poor children.

Courtesy: The Daily Star