Валютный союз ЕЭС
21 марта 2015г. в Астане президент РФ В. Путин объявил "Думаем, пришло время поговорить и о возможности формирования в перспективе валютного союза. Работая плечом к плечу, проще реагировать на внешние финансово-экономические угрозы, защищать наш совместный рынок".
Идея вплотную подумать над валютным союзом в рамках ЕЭС вызвала множество дискуссий у экономистов о целесообразности и своевременности данного шага. Классической работой на эту тему является - "A Theory of Optimum Currency Areas" Роберта Манделла, опубликованная в 1961г.
В своей статье на ресурсе economonitor.com экономист Ed Dolan подробно рассматривает теоретическую часть образования валютного союза и делает выводы о том, что поспешный шаг в построении единой валюты на данный момент вероятно приведет к не меньшим трудностям, чем в Еврозоне, и что в плане бюджетной политики Россия, Беларусь и Казахстан сильно различаются.
"Three of the most important conditions are structural similarities, flexible markets, and fiscal centralization.
The countries of the proposed EAEU currency area are very diverse. Russia and Kazakhstan are both oil exporters, but in other respects, they have many structural differences. Belarus and Armenia are oil importers that differ in economic structure both from Russia and from each other. In terms of structural similarity, then, the EAEU offers poor prospects for a currency union.
The proposed EAEU currency area is even more problematic in terms of market flexibility. Tiny Armenia ranks highest on the World Bank list at forty-five. Belarus is next, at fifty-seven. Russia, by far the dominant economy in the group, ranks sixty-second. Kazakhstan, at seventy-seven, ranks even lower. To the extent that the World Bank rankings are an indicator of market flexibility, then, the average rank for the EAEU is worse than the lowest for the EZ.
Back in Soviet times, when Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus and Armenia shared a common currency, they also shared a common fiscal system that financed basic services throughout the union. That system is no more, a fact that significantly reduces the prospects for a successful currency union within the EAEU."
В конце своей статьи автор "додумывает" за российские власти возможные цели столь поспешного заявления:
"One is that neither Putin nor his advisors have a good grasp of economics. The marginalization of most of the sounder economic thinkers that he listened to earlier in his Presidency favors this interpretation.
The other possibility is that he understands that a currency union among a structurally diverse grouping of sovereign states is a bad idea, but he thinks that he can do something about that pesky problem of sovereignty. In this interpretation, the EAEU currency union is just a foot in the door. The ultimate project is for bringing the ruble to Kazakhstan, Belarus and Armenia-perhaps ultimately to Ukraine, Latvia, and beyond-in the same way he brought the ruble to Crimea."
http://www.economonitor.com/dolanecon/2015/03/23/does-putins-proposed-eurasian-currency-union-make-sense/?utm_source=feedly&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=does-putins-proposed-eurasian-currency-union-make-sense