LyrArc Article Gist
Jan Corzine will tell the House Agriculture Committee in hearings today in prepared testimony: "I simply don't know where the money is," and that "there were an extraordinary number of transactions during MF Global's last few days." Trustees looking at MF Global liquidation say about $1.2 billion is missing from customer accounts. MF Global made extraordinary bets on European sovereign debt of Italy, Spain and Portugal and other countries of over $6 billion. He says he reduced the leverage of the firm from 37 to 1 in early 2010 to 30 to 1 in late 2011. He says there were discussions where his strategy was debated and that it was prudent strategy to make these investments. He lobbied the CFTC on the issue of whether there should be a ban on futures firms swapping customer funds for higher yielding assets such as government bonds, because these transactions would benefit futures commission merchants. There are questions of conflicts of interest because CFTC head Gary Gensler and Jan Corzine both worked closely at Goldman Sachs....

LyrArc Article Gist
In remarks published in English on the Bundesbank website, Jens Weidmann, Bundesbank president and member of the ECB governing council said: "The ECB should be aware of its independence. This also requires it to respect, and not to overstep its own mandate." This is seen as a pushback by the Bundesbank to ECB president Draghi's comments on July 23, 2012, about doing all that is necessary to keep the eurozone together. Weidmann referring to the situation in France recollecting his days as a student in France in 1987, said there were "two different worldviews colliding." And that this situation prevailed in all political debates right up to the present day. He says about deflationary tendencies -"If these countries go through adjustment processes which result in decreases in wages and prices, then this constitutes one-off shifts in the wage and price structure and not deflation."

LyrArc Article Gist
German leadership in the eurozone and the EU- with the strong stand for eurozone countries to do their economic homework and restore fiscal balance, and the action taken to bring the EU countries together on Russian intervention in Ukraine- is leading to questions about the dominant role played by Germany. Chancellor Merkel has played a leadership role partly because of the absence of other leaders with strong support in their home base who could provide such leadership. Merkel's poll rating in Germany actually shot up during the eurozone crisis from 40% in 2010 to 70% in 2013, and steady at 67% in June 2015, as German taxpayers and voters see Merkel as preventing debt ridden countries in the eurozone passing on higher costs in the debt crisis to Germany. With German wages kept low for the last decade to ensure a economic recovery and lower unemployment, Germans see no reason to support other eurozone countries when a low wage sector exists inside Germany, except under conditions that ensure fiscal balance. In a Harris poll taken in France June 30-July 1, 2015, Chancellor Merkel is rated higher at 43% expressing approval compared to 36% saying they approve of French premier Hollande's handling of the Greece and eurozone crisis. Over 50% of people in Spain and in France disapprove of Merkel's handling of the eurozone crisis, yet two thirds of France's main centre right party support Merkel's handling of the eurozone crisis. In the Harris poll when asked how Merkel, IMF, Hollande and Tsipras handled the Greece crisis people polled in France gave 43% approval to the IMF and Merkel compared to 36% for Hollande and Tsipras of Greece, and 60% disapprove of Hollande and Tsipras handling of the crisis compared to 53% disapproval for the IMF and Merkel. The Christian Democrats party in Germany has dominant leaders in its tradition starting with Konrad Adenauer in the early postwar years, through the Kohl years during reunification and Merkel in the eurozone crisis. By contrast the Social Democrats from the period under Wily Brandt, through the Schmidt years and Schroeder have operated under more of a consensus leadership. Under Sigmar Gabriel or some other Social Democratic leader Germany is likely to have a different style of leadership in the future, especially because the German public does not favor Germany playing this kind of dominant role. At different points in the eurozone crisis Merkel's leadership was needed for decisionmaking- making banks take a 50% writedown on their loans in negotiation with Charles Dallara in Brussels, calling for Italy's president to bring in a new government (led by Mario Monti) when premier Berlusconi failed to make needed changes, and providing flexibility for spending rules for Spain, Italy and France. Merkel has actually moved to the centre to maintain popular support inside Germany, especially since the new coalition government was formed with Social Democrat leader Sigmar Gabriel. On the other major issue of immigration Merkel has provided decisive leadership to prevent the rise of anti-immigrant parties in Germany. Herfried Munkler, author of "Power in the Middle," about why Germany is playing this role may provide clues to Germany's role- by representing different aspects of German public opinion Merkel has prevented the rise of right wing populist or nationalist parties in Germany, which would distort the German narrative about what it sees as its role in keeping Europe together after three wars. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The participation of Islamist men who did a lot of the hard fighting against Gaddafi with secular leaders in the new government of Libya. Islamist leaders complain the west does not understand them and their aspirations for freedom above all else. One Islamist leader says westerners think we want to lock up our women in boxes. See the amazing account of Belhaj in an interview with Nordland of the New York Times, Sept. 1, 2011. Belhaj is an Islamist who led the rebel fighters into Tripoli and was appointed head of the administration in Tripoli. He tells Nordland he is grateful to NATO for its help and holds no rancor for the past.

LyrArc Article Gist
NATO was formed in the days of the Truman administration on 25th July 1949, following the Berlin Blockade, the coup in Czechoslovakia by Soviets, and the efforts to set up pro soviet governments in Turkey and Greece. It accomplished its purpose by pushing back against the Soviet effort securing democracy in Greece and Turkey in the 1950's. Much of this was achieved under Heads of NATO from the US- Gen. Eisenhower, Gen. Ridgway, Gen. Guenther and Gern Norstad proteges of Ike all from West Point by 1964, when Brezhnev was new head of Soviet Union and by 1991 Warsaw Pact of Soviets setup in 1955 was dissolved yet NATO was not. The US interests shifted to Asia - Gen MacArthur leading a UN effort in Korea and the US leading its own effort in Vietnam in the 1960's. The Soviet threat actually receded after 1964 when Brezhnev became head of Soviet Union till 1982. During that period in the 1970's till today the face of NATO as today was from a series of heads of governments of Dutch Stikker in 1970's or other small European states such as Norway Stoltenberg and Rutte Netherlands again in 2025. It could be said that none of these leaders  of small EU countries represented US interests- or even European interests- a point the DJT administration is trying to make. It hurt the US in Venezuela as Russia propped up a regime which led to millions of refugees entering the US illegally. And it hurt Europe as Russia propped up the Syrian regime with millions of refugees entering Germany and destabilizing its political structure. Going back if a new defense institution was set up to replace NATO by the Europeans in 1970's this would have been the right step which would have not led to Russia propping up regimes in the Americas or the Middle East. A goal that is being discussed with Russia by the DJT administration to refocus American efforts in a new direction and pause not just the Ukraine war but also put the US  and Russia in a new direction with the new competition from 3 billion people in China and India. WSJ Editorial Board takes the British position on the Ukraine peace proposals with centuries old skeptical attitude on Russia's intentions. The US government position put forward by DJT is that there are constructive discussions with Russia, and the need to settle the underlying issues behind the conflict. This includes NATO's future. NATO setup in 1949 for Soviets,  on the borders of Russia in 2025 after the end of the Cold War when its rival the Warsaw Pact set up in 1955 of the Soviets was disbanded in 1991. The British position comes from centuries of conflict in Europe and its interests in protecting its Empire till the 1950's remaining unchanged, and cannot reflect American interests in the 21st century as its economy competes with China and India and the EU, and seeks to do this by keeping former colonial powers out of the Americas including Russia, and China.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Prime Minister Medvedev of Russia proposes banning advertising of cigarettes and blames cigarette companies for targeting children and women. He says Russia had unfortunately not calculated the risks of investment by foreign cigarette companies. A ban on smoking in public spaces will go into effect in 2015. Each year he says cigarettes take a toll of 400,000 lives- "it works out that each year an entire large city disappears from the earth due to tobacco.:

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ story provides a fascinating look at how Italy planned for too long, but failed to finally execute the final step of using the submersible steel floodgates that were already built to tackle just the kind of flooding that happened recently.  Problems include the use of submersible steel floodgates that would go back under water  after use in a flood, causing an additional complication to building the floodgates. The city itself was not entirely behind the plan so that execution was delayed. The politics and corruption added additional delays that astonishingly delayed the plan for over 10 years. About 80% of Venice was flooded with waters rising 6 feet above normal levels on November 12, 2019. It is hard to believe that 78 yellow steel barriers stayed on the seabed instead of blocking the three points at which water could enter from the sea into Venice. Most of the area has normal land barriers and the steel gates were designed to block water from entering at the smaller points that separate land barriers. It is also unbelievable that the plan started after a bad flood in 1966, construction beginning in 2003 after approval by over 12 public bodies, expert panels and courts on the complicated design. Costs went up as years passed from $1.7 billion to $5.5 billion. Ordinary Italians say Rotterdam has similar problems and has dams and no flooding, that the underwater design of the gates did not make sense just for aesthetics. Some experts say the underwater design doomed the project by making it costly and difficult, bureaucratic delays did the rest. The longer the delays and higher the cost the faster it eroded support in Venice and Italy, leading to this improbable result of building the flood gates with the underwater design, testing them but not making it operational in the final step, and not authorizing the use on November 11, 2019. The gates were in disuse astonishingly for so long that rust was discovered at one point.  Venice is now losing much of the population near its canals with only 50,000 remaining from a one time population of 171,000. The latest flood damage is over $1 billion and inexplicable after so much effort building the 74 yellow floodgates under water. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Neil Irwin in the NYT why the U.S. China Phase 1 Trade Agreement is more than a hill of soyabeans as he puts it, more than about all the soyabeans that the U.S. farmers can sell to China. China's economy was seeing the effect of U.S. tariffs. Additional tariffs to cover all imports from China to the U.S. would have worsened this. China avoided this by agreeing to Phase 1. The U.S. had looked for some enforcement mechanism based on China putting this down in a written agreement particularly for avoiding subsidies to state enterprises and improper access to U.S. advanced technologies. China's reluctance to do this led to Mr. Trump saying that China had reversed its position and Trump expanding the tariffs stage by stage. These issues are now set aside for Phase 2 still to be negotiated. Both sides taking what they could get. China relief from the threat of tariffs on all exports. The U.S. under Mr. Lighthizer's negotiating leadership retaining the enforcement idea through the tariffs that are still in place of 25% on half of China's exports to the U.S. The bonus for Mr. Trump is the goodwill China generates by agreeing to buy all the U.S. farmers can produce, farmers having not only stood behind Mr. Trump but also forming a key part of his support base. China will continue to compete in technological areas with the U.S., and the state enterprise model which worked for China as Mr. Xi tells visitors will continue. Phase 2 is just that Phase 2, when and if it can be negotiated between Trump with his negotiator Lighthizer and Xi with his negotiator Liu He. On key points neither side is budging. A key goal for Mr. Trump is to put the trade surplus China enjoys of $300 plus billion a year with the U.S. on a serious downward path, and bring so many of the jobs and manufacturing back home. On this trade data for 2019 and the plan for 2020 of both countries is clear. It should be down each year by 10-20% for the next few years, a major achievement of Mr. Lighthizer, who did the same with  Japan under president Reagan. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist magazine looks at the mess that Brexit has become and reflects on what this means. The first explanation is that Britons always loathed the evolution of the common market into the European Union. The second that Brexit was simply a result of a simmering civil war between the successful metropolitan  liberal parts of Britain and the provincial conservative parts of Britain. A third one is seen as equally plausible that the country's leadership has failed, that its model of leadership is coming apart.  It says the problem is the chumocracy with David Cameron made the poor decision to go for a referendum on the EU without thinking this through carefully, taking risks with the future of Britain for the sake of narrow party interests. 51% and you are out of the EU was never a fair option when major decisions of such type are handled with great care, even confronted with less momentous decisions other countries use two stage votes or call for super majorities. Basically the whole referendum was flawed to begin with and the people making the decision gambled with the future of Britain and the British economy.  The Economist magazine says the current candidates for Tory leadership, are all inadequate, one even suggesting that Britain should not balk at leaving the EU with no deal because it would create a temporary shortage of Mars bars. It looks at the leaders class in Britain as says it preserves many of the failures of the old establishment by being introverted and self-serving. It sees less expertise and more bluff in their backgrounds in public relations, journalism (Cameron, Johnson) and lighter experience (May as analyst), and sees a singular lack of self restraint because it believes it comes out merit based selection compared to the old establishment. What the Economist magazine sees is meritocracy transformed into crony capitalism for Blair in Labour party and Cameron, Osborne in the Conservative Party. One of the problems it says is the erosion of other ways to enter the leadership ranks from a range of places- business, unions, local government, working class talent, and other places- something that existed in the early postwar years to the sixties. Gradually a shift is taking place already to create new options and broaden the places from which leaders can emerge for broader more effective selection. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Poland has a huge shortage of doctors and nurses. The ratio of doctors to every 100,000 of population is the lowest in the European Union. It is twice that in Germany whose relative success in tackling covid pandemic comes from having foreign doctors and nurses treat patients. Consider that the average age of Polish doctors is 53, only a few years from retirement. The situation in terms of immigration reminds pone of East Germany and its depopulation of young people who left for West Germany. Something like this has happened in Poland in health care.  In similar ways other countries in the EU, Hungary, Slovakia, Romania stocked up on ventilators but now have few doctors and nurses left to operate them. It is stretching the limits of human endurance as this report shows in WSJ, with doctors working 36 hour shifts and working 73 hours a week.  Here we see Dr. Rotnicki, who works these long hours at a hospital in western Poland and says that it is like the Second World War, that it is hard times in Poland for health care workers. This report says Italian and British hospitals, not just German ones, are tackling coronavirus with Polish, Hungarian and Romanian doctors and nurses. This report shows that headhunters in Germany drive in to western Poland blanketing windshields with pamphlets promising 5 times more pay, 2 years of free language classes and housing. In Slovakia a third of all nursing graduates leave the coutnry immediately after graduation. In Poland not nursing pay has lagged behind with fewer going into nursing schools. Staff remaining in the region are older and educated under communism when less English was taught, or have returned back home from years overseas. Forcing doctors to give up private practice and work in public hospitals during coronavirus pandemic is not working in Hungary, where surveys find 6 out of ten medical school graduates intending to leave Hungary. These doctors say they are better off working at Aldi and Tesco if needed and making more pay, plus getting weekends off. Poland only recently increased pay for healthcare workers, some even survived on cash given to them by patients. Not a good situation for a country to be in and reflecting the wrong priorities not just in the U.S. and western Europe, but also in eastern Europe, during the last 3 decades. These priorities shifted money away from health care, education and infrastructure priorities. The people simply lost control of their spending allocation to "financial markets" that shifted money in a way that benefited only small group in society neglecting others and national interests. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Kevin Maurer looks back at 15 years of covering Afghanistan since 2004, and asks was it worth it.  The conflict has cost 145,000 lives for the U.S. period of the war alone. Not counting the war in which the Russians were involved in the decade before the U.S. involvement. In fact the Russian involvement in Afghanistan was costly enough to hasten the collapse of the Soviet Union and bring Gorbachev to power to unwind the war and make the changes that led to the collapse of the Berlin Wall.  2400 U.S. servicemen dead and 20,000 Americans wounded. The cost to the U.S. is $737 billion for this war, according to a report in 2018 from Brown University's Costs of War Project. Just as the Soviet Union showed the damage from this war the U.S. has seen the cost of this war and foreign entanglement in another war that started accidentally with international interventions in the Iran-Iraq region as a cost that was borne with consequences. This includes the neglect of infrastructure and the damage to the middle class prosperity built up in the 1950's and 1960's after the Second World War. The U.S. got into this war with 9/11 attacks on New York City. By 2010 what began as a war fought by a few Special Operations teams turned into a war with troop levels reaching 100,000. Presidents Bush and Obama both failed to end the war by winning it. In 2014 finally combat operations stopped and American troops mainly conducted anti-terrorism operations and trained Afghan forces. In recent years the war has gradually disappeared from the national discussion in the U.S. and is barely talked about. President Trump wants to end the war even if it means talking to the Taliban and negotiations directly with the Taliban are ongoing.  One result of this war is the aversion to costly international entanglements and the highly unpopular nature of the conflicts. There are serious costs of the conflict in terms of neglected domestic priorities including infrastructure, loss of U.S. technological edge in key industries, and the competition from China, an the investments in health, education, services that were not made, the increase in inequalities and the diminishing of the middle class. The global financial crisis of 2008, the result of faulty banking, added an economic dimension through the loss of middle class savings in the U.S., worsening the financial situation of the middle class in the U.S.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Dennis Berman takes a very instructive and reflective look at what happened in history, the thirties when something like what we are seeing now happened, a huge global downturn. One thing that is being repeated is the tendency to think that things will recover maybe in 2009 or 2010. But oftentimes this is not the way it turns out. President Hoover said to the American people in May 1930, " I am convinced that we have now passed the worst and with continued unity of effort we shall rapidly recover." Hoover is now seen negatively but a visit to the museum section of the Hoover Institution at Stanford University shows that he was a geological engineer, well travelled to other countries, was President of Stanford when it was a small school, and was active in relief efforts for Russia in the years of civil war after the first world war. Was he less compassionate than FDR, was he less educated, and less aware of conditions in other countries than FDR, and less determined than FDR? Could it be that he did not realize the depth of the downturn that lay ahead and for this reason failed to take more aggressive action? WIth FDR, less well known as Berman points out, is the period of 1936 and 1937 covered in the book "The Forgotten Man", a popular history of the Depression by Amity Shlaes. The Federal Reserve used New Deal laws to tighten reserve requirements on the nation's banks. The goal was to make the banks stronger, but the unanticipated result was that the banks tightened still further. This aggravated things in the economy when it was still stuck in difficulties. The Dow Jones Average fell by more than a third between August 1937 and January 1938. Unemployment jumped. Historians call it the 'depression within the Depression. Just a year before this period, FDR predicted in 1935, "Never since my inauguration in March 1933, have I felt so unmistakably the atmosphere of recovery." Berman reminds us that the main force in the economy at this time however well intentioned is the government. And the government is at the whims of politicians, and the error proneness of human beings in positions of responsibility, with so many decisions taken on an ad hoc basis, responding to emergencies and dire situations as they arise, with not enough time for careful thought, and often with little sleep. The AIG intervention has already taken $177 billion in government money in a few months, and everything is being done on a crash basis with little preparation mostly in response to surprises popping up in financial markets. As Frank Rich points out the danger to the President's plans and vision is not from the work outlined for education, energy, health care, or Republicans, as much as it is from this uncertain element about available capital to make the wheels of the economy move again to sustain employment and incomes....

LyrArc Article Gist
Is time slipping away for Russia to restore what it sees as its special relationship with Ukraine, as Ukraine finds its own identity through its language and independent Orthodox Christian Church since 2019. This WSJ podcast report is by James Marson who lived in Kiev from 2007 to 2012, and Ryan Knutson, with the Archbishop of St Michael's cathedral in Kiev, and the editor of Elle magazine edition in Ukraine joining in.  To understand Ukraine one has to know that Russian is the language of the cities, which means people in Kiev speak Russian. People in the countryside Ukrainian. This is very unusual for a nation and it shows the condition of the country for centuries where intellectuals in cities dominated cultural and political life distant from the people in the countryside. For centuries Ukraine was dominated alternately by either Poland and Lithuania or Russia other than a period of 200 years around 1250-1400 when the Mongols were dominant. The peasants and countryside suffered greatly as in India and other parts of central Europe in the long history till the modern period in 1900.  Russians see their origins in the Kyivan Rus, a state bringing together the different ethnicities Ukrainian and Russian in the period 1000-1240 under the Byzantine Church in Constantinople. Kyiv, the modern capital of Ukraine called Kiev today being the capital of this state. This is the cultural connection that president Putin and Russians see as one they do not want to see drift away. After the Russian state drove out the Mongols in 1240 the northern provinces and Kiev became part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, and the rest became part of a new Russian state. After 1650 Ukraine became part of the Russian Empire and by 1800 with the partition of Poland was fully made part of the Russian Empire. Russian is now after 1800 the language of the intellectual class in Kiev and the cities, and Ukrainian language persists in the countryside. In 1804 Ukrainian is banned as a language and subject of instruction in schools. The end of the Russian Empire under the Tsars in 1917 ended the ban on the Ukrainian language and a period of respect of the cultures of the different soviet republics including Ukraine ensued. Putin has strong feelings on Kyiv, or modern Kiev, as the place where Russia as a country began. He wrote a 7000 word essay says this report in WSJ in 2010 on this relationship as he sees it.  Yet the period of protests in Kiev since 2010 has resulted in Ukraine building  its own identity as a nation. Magazines in the country are required to use Ukrainian for 50% of their circulation. People in Kiev now use Ukrainian instead of Russian as the sense of national identity is being revived. During 1917-1921 Ukraine fought a war with the Bolsheviks after the Russian Empire collapsed. This history is why Russia is acting now to push for Ukraine not drift completely away. It is also what makes Ukraine different from Poland which has cultural ties to Western Europe. It is why the US or Germany is not willing to go to war with Russia over Ukraine, as it would over Poland. It is also why Russia may not see war as the best option as about one third of Ukrainians say they will fight to defend their country, according to this report. The situation is complex and this is why both sides want to negotiate some way out in which Russia wants the US and NATO respecting its sense of connection with Ukraine in its history with Kyiv as the place Russian state started, and Russia not going further. Russia's tangible proposal is for no to Ukraine joining NATO or the European Union. The US and Germany want something else- the right of Eastern European nations that suffered from Tsarist or Soviet domination or German Hapsburg domination to finally be able to assert their own right of self-determination as democratic countries. This would include Finland. And also Sweden. Ukraine is not another small Eastern European country. Population is 44 million and it is the second largest by area in Europe after Russia.  Russia may also see the move to bring this up at this time as a way to unify the country against what it sees as threat from NATO. As Brendan Simms of Cambridge notes in his recent book -Europe, France went through a period after 1600 when it needed external danger as a way to unify the country, as much as unity of the country to fight external danger. The economic costs after building Nordstream II pipeline are to0 great for both Russia and Germany, and for the US and Russia during the pandemic, which means there is a real need to find a way out for all sides.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The declining prospects for construction and heavy equipment manufacturers in the Chinese market with the slowdown in growth in China. This affects Caterpillar Inc, Volvo AB and Komatsu Ltd. Between 2008 to 2010 investments in machinery, construction projects and other types of fixed assets went up by 61% to $4.36 trillion. China's domestic manufacturers Sany Heavy Industry Co. and Zoomlion Heavy Industry Science and Technology Co. also expanded during this period. Now analysts see demand in China as having collapsed compared to the earlier period. Monthly sales of hydraulic excavators for July 2012 declined by 23% to 5886 units, and first half sales were down by 38%, according to machinery trade association. China's stimulus spending also contributed to the surge. The new stimulus planned for 2013 is more selective in investments and much smaller because of overcapacity and overbuilding in many sectors. Some investments such as John Deere's new plant under construction in China and two in Brazil also under construction, will move forward at a slower pace and impact margins. Cummins CEO, Linebarger sees the situation continuing throught he second half of 2012 and recovering gradually in 2013. The slowdown is not deterring construction machinery equipment manufacturers. Caterpillar CEO, Doug Oberhelman, sees demand accelerating after the lull and is slowing its plan to double workforce in China to 11,000, and quadruple excavator production by 2015, but not idling assembly plants so that he has inventory on hand for a recovery. Exports of made in China excavators is also an option, and exports increased 115% in July 2012, over the prior year. But this may be based on manufacturers belief that the drop in demand in 2008 and recovery in 2010 will recur, which may only result in higher inventories as the current stimulus is much smaller and selective. The Chinese government plans to follow the DRC/ World Bank Report and is moving away from the large role of state run firms in the economy....

LyrArc Article Gist
The IMF extends $100 billion in loans to countries that have healthy economies but need temporary help, such as S.Korea, Brazil, Mexco and Singapore. Some of these countries have borrowed heavily in other currencies and the drop in the value of their own currencies makes repayment difficult. No strings such as requirements to raise interest rates and to cut public spending are attached to this program. Under this program countries could borrow five times the amount they are normally entitled to, $25 billion in Brazil's case, without the strict conditions that normally accompany such loans. Nobel Prize winner Stiglitz was chief economist at the World Bank. He said the funds use of the words restore confidence itself could make a lot of countries nervous. That is because in the Asian and Latin American crises in the past, the IMF set strict conditions to increase interest rates and cut public spending and food subsidies at a time when the poor especially and the rest of the people, all needed help, thereby increasing public distress. In the developed countries stimulus packages and infrastructure spending goes up to support employment and incomes, but the IMF has advocated quite the reverse in the case of the developing countries, with the US Treasury a key factor in IMF support and ideology. Which is why countries in Asia like South Korea see a stigma attached to the IMF and are refusing IMF help. In Pakistan also the IMF support is a last resort or Plan C. Iceland for instance raised rates in return for IMF help from 6% to 18% to try to stabilize the currency. The IMF was created as part of the Bretton Woods agreement of 1944 when the Allied Powers USA and Britain and other countries that sent representatives met in New Hampshire for a postwar economic system. Japan, S. Korea, India and China and many other countries were not part of it because of the war or colonial empires....

LyrArc Article Gist
The Russian currency, the rouble crashed to 0.8 cents to the US dollar from 1.3 cents. It has now bounced back to 1.2 cents. Peter Coy of the NYT says this is the result of Russian oil and gas exports to Europe and other parts of the world which continued after sanctions for the invasion of Ukraine. The increase in oil prices from the war actually increased Russian oil revenues by a third. Another reason is the steps taken by the Russian government to ask for payment for energy supplies in roubles.