Palestine Declares Independence and Its Currency Is: the Israeli Shekel?
Worldwide euphoria has been generated by the Palestinian threat to "declare independence" in September 2011. Never mind that Palestine no longer has a legitimately elected parliament or president, thus no legitimate government. From Syria westward, the Arabs are governed by illegitimate regimes. Why not add one more?
Money, however, is a reality that no euphoria can survive. The money that circulates under the Palestinian Authority (PA) is the Israeli new shekel. The interest rates set monthly by the Bank of Israel dictate Palestinian financial policy. As long as this continues, Palestinian claims of "independence" will be a sham, a joke.
How much of a joke it will be was recently underlined by the quick collapse of a Palestinian publicity stunt. In March 2011, two clever dicks in Ramallah started an internet campaign calling on Palestinians to write "Free Palestine" on Israeli banknotes. The scheme collapsed within forty-eight hours when the Palestinian banks, none other, announced that they would refuse to honor the defaced currency. Why? Because they were concerned that Israeli banks would not honor it. As in many countries, it is a crime in Israel to write anything on banknotes. Whoever did write "Free Palestine" on the money in their pockets just made it worthless.
Consider also this: banks are constantly in need of new cash, and not merely because banknotes wear out and coins get lost. So one of the commodities that Israel supplies to Gaza, along with flour and toilet paper, is freshly printed shekel notes. Without them, Gaza's Hamas government would see economic life under its rule gradually becoming paralyzed. Israel has to supply its currency to Gaza and Hamas cannot refuse it.
Curiously, for the 2006 parliamentary elections Hamas adopted a platform that included a pledge to "mint Palestinian currency." But Hamas shelved that pledge when it formed a government after winning the elections; it has ignored it since seizing absolute power in Gaza in 2007.
It is amazing that amid all the buzz in the "international community" about whether Palestine is ready for independence, the question of a currency for Palestine has not been featured at all. Now that the head of the International Monetary Fund has been thrown into jail, the question is even less likely to be considered.
Apart from the occasional academic study, the only people who seem to have taken the problem seriously are a few officials in the Palestinian Monetary Authority (PMA). This is a body that most people have never heard of. It was set up as part of the Oslo Accords with the remit of authorizing and supervising banks under the PA. Should Palestine genuinely become independent, the PMA would have to be transformed into its central bank.
Last January, the PMA made a briefly noticed announcement that it was planning the creation of a Palestinian currency. So far as is known, however, Palestinian banknotes are not being printed secretly in preparation for a big surprise in September 2011. The only decision made was to choose a name: the Palestinian pound. That is, they wish to revive the currency of the British Mandate in Palestine. It is another manifestation of the fundamental Palestine aspiration of turning the clock back to a time when Israel did not exist.
Most Palestinians would doubtless embrace the Palestinian pound with the same enthusiasm as met the "Free Palestine" campaign. And they would not realize, until maybe too late, that they might be endangering not just some notes in their pockets but their whole financial existence.
At present, as determined also by the Oslo Accords, three currencies are legal tender under the Palestinian authority: the Israeli new shekel, the Jordanian dinar and the US dollar. With the revival of the Palestinian pound, it is to be expected that the PA, out of national pride, will declare this to be the only permitted currency and demand that all bank accounts be converted into it. Thereafter, all would depend on Palestinian financial probity, which is not a highly valued item. If the Palestinian pound collapsed in the manner of the Zimbabwean dollar, the savings of Palestinians could be wiped out.
Recall that after Hamas and Fatah signed a reconciliation agreement in April 2011, the Israeli finance minister briefly suspended the transfer to the PA of tax revenues collected on its behalf. The result was that the Palestinian government, which is the biggest employer by far under the PA, could not pay monthly salaries for May 2011. Had the Palestinian pound been in place, no problem: the Palestinians could just have printed lots more money. Of course, the exchange rate of their currency would then have plummeted against all others.
Israel's suspension of those transfers aroused the world. Less remembered today are much more serious and prolonged suspensions of Palestinian finance. After the Hamas won the Palestinian elections of 2006 and a Hamas-led government took over, not just Israel but also the US, Canada and the EU froze all funds to the PA. The resulting financial crisis forced the Hamas prime minister to resign in January 2007. Then a unity government briefly existed until June 2007, after which Hamas ruled Gaza but was suppressed in the West Bank. These developments enabled the donors to resume the supply of funds to the PA
The EU has also used the threat of suspending financial aid to pressure the PA to reduce an ever-growing number of public sector employees. Were the PA to be paying them with its own currency, however, the greater pressure would come from a Palestinian public eager for state jobs.
For many European political decision makers, the existence of any such problem has been obscured by the introduction of the euro a decade ago. If, say, the government of the Basque region of Spain were to declare unilateral independence, then independent Euskadi might face many obstacles, but a currency would not be one of them. It would obviously continue to use the euro as at present.
Indeed, this was the model adopted by the Kosovo government in its bid for independence in 2008. It had already adopted the German mark in 1999 and made the switch to the euro along with Germany. This was relatively easy, since the other countries in the area of Kosovo have either already adopted the euro, like its neighbour Montenegro, or aspire to do so in the future.
Palestine, however, is a long way from the euro zone and even further from the US. Consider its neighbors. The Israeli new shekel has fluctuated considerably against the euro and the US dollar, but it has been strengthening against both in recent years. On the other hand, the Jordanian dinar has gradually declined from about 1.6 euro a decade ago to 1.0 euro at present. The Egyptian pound has fallen by nearly two thirds against the euro in that time.
Obviously, the economies of all three countries are far from being in synch with the euro or with each other. In particular, if Egypt had been on the euro, it would have been forced to adopt the same drastic measures as Greece currently, precipitating an earlier collapse of the Mubarak regime. But even the pound sterling has fluctuated markedly against the euro, although only twenty miles separate the UK from France. The channel tunnel has not prevented that.
All this shows that the euro or dollar is a non-starter for Palestine, although the head of the PMA has floated the idea of pegging the Palestinian pound to one of them. Sooner or later, the pegging would come unstuck, probably with a big crash. There would also be rich pickings to be made by Palestinian insiders. Remember how George Soros reportedly made a billion dollars, betting on the collapse of the pegging of the pound sterling to the European Currency Unit (the predecessor of the euro). That pegging had survived a mere two years.
Likewise, even if Palestine adopted a neighboring currency, this would have various major consequences, depending on the choice made. Besides the fluctuations mentioned, the there are differences of GDP. The GDP of the Palestinian territories is currently about a quarter of that of Jordan; it is a mere thirtieth of that of either Israel or Egypt. Thus Palestine would have limited impact within a currency union with Jordan; it has none in its current union with Israel.
On the other hand, any replacement of the Israeli new shekel would disrupt many financial transactions that are currently easy. These include not just the disruptions that would occur if European countries reverted from the euro to national currencies. There would also be complications for the cosy arrangements that accompany EU donations to the PA.
At present, the EU contributes large amounts of money for Palestinian government salaries. The Palestinians spend a lot of that money on Israeli products, while Israelis spend a lot of their money on European ones. So Israel has a large trade surplus with Palestine and a large deficit with the EU, but everyone is happy except, maybe, some European taxpayers. Obviously, the use of the Israeli currency by Palestinians facilitates this cycle of payments.
All in all, the currency is a major issue for any kind of independent Palestine. So far, it has been ignored by the relevant political decision makers, whether locally or internationally. As long as that is the case, talk of Palestinian independence remains a bluff.
Reader comments on this item
|Currencies [7 words]||Bobbin||Jan 5, 2014 14:17|
|Question [19 words]||Peter||Jul 30, 2013 12:15|
Comment on this item
by Alan M. Dershowitz
by Pierre Rehov
For terrorists, the death of innocent children is irrelevant. In a society that promotes martyrdom as the ultimate sign of success, the death of innocent children can sometimes even be seen as a public relations blessing.
In every action, intent is paramount. There should never be a moral equivalence painted between the deliberate killing of civilians, and a retaliation that tragically leads to casualties among civilians.
There is, however, one small difference: in the Middle East, reporters are threatened, except in Israel. Their choice becomes a simple one: promote the Palestinian point of view or stop working in the West Bank. Keep the eye of the camera dirty or lose your job. This show should not go on.
by Khaled Abu Toameh
Since 1948, the Arab countries and government have been paying mostly lip service to the Palestinians.
"They have money and oil, but don't care about the Palestinians, even though we are Arabs and Muslims like them. What a Saudi or Qatari sheikh spends in one night in London, Paris or Las Vegas could solve the problem of tens of thousands of Palestinians." — Palestinian human rights activist.
"Some Arabs were hoping that Israel would rid them of Hamas." — Ashraf Salameh, Gaza City.
"Some of the Arab regimes are interested in getting rid of the resistance in order to remove the burden of the Palestinian cause, which threatens the stability of their regimes." — Mustafa al-Sawwaf, Palestinian political analyst.
"Most Arabs are busy these days with bloody battles waged by their leaders, who are struggling to survive. These battles are raging in Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Libya and the Palestinian Authority." — Mohammed al-Musafer, columnist.
"The Arab leaders don't know what they want from the Gaza Strip. They don't even know what they want from Israel." — Yusef Rizka, Hamas official.
by Soeren Kern
European elites, who take pride in viewing the EU as a "postmodern" superpower, have long argued that military hard-power is illegitimate in the 21st century. Unfortunately for Europe, Russia (along with China and Iran) has not embraced the EU's fantastical soft-power worldview, in which "climate change" is now said to pose the greatest threat to European security.
For its part, the European Commission, the EU's administrative branch, which never misses an opportunity to boycott institutions in Israel, has issued only a standard statement on the shooting down of MH17 in Ukraine, which reads: "The European Union will continue to follow this issue very closely."
The EU has made only half-hearted attempts to develop alternatives to its dependency on Russian oil and gas.
by Shoshana Bryen
Proportionality in international law is not about equality of death or civilian suffering, or even about [equality of] firepower. Proportionality weighs the necessity of a military action against suffering that the action might cause to enemy civilians in the vicinity.
"Under international humanitarian law and the Rome Statute, the death of civilians during an armed conflict, no matter how grave and regrettable does not constitute a war crime.... even when it is known that some civilian deaths or injuries will occur. A crime occurs if there is an intentional attack directed against civilians (principle of distinction) or an attack is launched on a military objective in the knowledge that the incidental civilian injuries would be clearly excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage (principle of proportionality)." — Luis Moreno-Ocampo, Chief Prosecutor, International Criminal Court.
"The greater the military advantage anticipated, the larger the amount of collateral damage -- often civilian casualties -- which will be "justified" and "necessary." — Dr. Françoise Hampton, University of Essex, UK.