The recent missile strike by Iran on Israel, which occurred approximately six months ago, has raised significant concerns among central bankers worldwide. This event has the potential to disrupt carefully laid plans for monetary policy easing, presenting a complex challenge for financial policymakers.
The attack, involving 180 missiles, has increased the likelihood of a robust response from Israel. One potential target could be Iran's Kharg Island facility, which handles about 90% of the country's oil exports. Should this escalate to restrictions on access to the Strait of Hormuz, a critical waterway through which a fifth of daily oil supply passes, crude prices could potentially surpass $100 per barrel, reminiscent of the spike witnessed in 2022 following Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Jay Powell, Chair of the U.S. Federal Reserve, and Christine Lagarde, President of the European Central Bank, are faced with a delicate balancing act. While there are reasons to maintain composure, the potential for a significant energy supply shock looms large. Central banks have historically struggled to manage such shocks effectively, as evidenced by the soaring inflation rates in the U.S. and Europe during the 2022 power crisis.
The situation presents a dilemma for central bankers. Continuing with planned rate cuts could fuel further price increases, while pausing or even raising borrowing costs might significantly increase the risk of recession in an already sluggish global economy. This challenge is particularly acute given the relatively recent establishment of inflation targeting as a monetary policy strategy, first adopted by New Zealand in 1990.
Currently, market expectations do not fully account for these geopolitical risks. In Europe, traders anticipate a second consecutive rate cut to 3.25% on October 17, 2024, with further reductions expected to bring the deposit rate to 1.75% by October next year. Similarly, U.S. derivative prices suggest a benchmark rate of around 3% by October 2025, down from the current 4.9%.
It's worth noting that central banks, including the U.S. Federal Reserve established in 1913 and the European Central Bank founded in 1998, are still some distance from contemplating a major policy reversal. However, having missed an inflationary spike within the last five years, they are likely to respond more swiftly if the situation in the Middle East intensifies.
The current scenario echoes historical challenges faced by central banks. The concept of "stagflation," coined in the 1960s to describe high inflation and low growth, may once again become relevant. Moreover, the effectiveness of tools like the Taylor Rule, proposed in 1993 as a guideline for interest rate decisions, may be tested in this complex geopolitical and economic landscape.
As the situation unfolds, central bankers must navigate these turbulent waters with caution. The potential for a wider conflict and its impact on global oil supplies remains a significant concern. The response of key players like Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil exporter, could play a crucial role in offsetting potential supply disruptions.
In this context, the wisdom accumulated since the establishment of the first modern central bank, the Bank of England in 1694, will be put to the test. The coming months will reveal whether the monetary policy strategies developed over centuries can effectively address the unique challenges posed by today's geopolitical tensions and their economic repercussions.