Investing in the Iraqi Dinar: What do we really know?

[jeff stevens]

Thank You for all of your pains taken work on the intel you bring us. What is next?

[Quart]

Steve, what a wonderful response! I'm glad that you didn't take it as a personal affront but as an honest desire to know the facts in the case. Still, I believe from reading the UN documents that the member state assessments are calculated using various data solely for the determining of yearly dues and are not to be construed as reflective of actual exchange rates. The funny thing about this is that I believe that the revaluation of the dinar is imminent. But when someone presents a cogent argument, as you did, I can't resist engaging, if for nothing else than the benefit of hearing the response and refining my ability to think clearly and communicate precisely.

[Enorrste]

That was very generously state, Quart, and I absolutely agree that reasoned discussion is the only good way to arrive at reasonable conclusions. I have absolutely no problem at all in spirited discussion. In addition, I have no problem when we end the discussion on different sides. For heaven's sake, if everyone is going to agree with me how can I sharpen my own knife? Thanks for the discussion. I await in anticipation for another one.

Steve

[Lepoc2635]

How refreshing it is to read a well thought out discussion... Nicely stated on both sides.

[DSS900]

I love this guys. Don't stop now!

[Quart]

Steve, my feelings, too! Here is a link to a UN search page. The fifth search result is a PowerPoint presentation of how the UN determines the assessment rates. It is very interesting! (if you're an "info geek" like me.)

http://search.un.org/search?q=assessment+exchange+rate+currency&btnG=Search+the+UN&ie=utf8&output=xml_no_dtd&client=UN_Website_English&num=10&lr=lang_en&proxystylesheet=UN_Website_en&oe=UTF-8&Submit=Go&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&entqr=0&ud=1&site=un_org

Here is another UN page that discusses the methodology of assessing member state dues; http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2009/gaab3917.doc.htm

Here is a pull quote from it: "The Committee had met with representatives of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund to discuss purchasing power parity rates. It had also reaffirmed its earlier recommendation that conversion rates based on market exchange rates should be used in preparing the next scale, except where that would cause excessive fluctuations and distortions in the gross national income of Member States expressed in United States dollars. In that case, price-adjusted rates or other appropriate conversion rates should be used." I believe this is showing us that the assessments or a calculation that may or may not include a real currency exchange rate.

[gottarock]

Its a pleasure to hear 2 opposing points of view discussed between 2 people that can maturely and intelligently explain their positions and end up not only agreeing to dissagree, but thoroughly enjoying the exchange. Looking forward to continued exchange......if Congress could ony learn to do this we'd all be better off. Thank you both. More would be greatly appreciated, I'm sure, by all.

[Quart]

Here is another UN page that shows two definitions for "Exchange." http://fb.unsystemceb.org/glossary?search_letter=e

The first is simply "Exchange" and is defined as "The rate at which one currency is converted to another (all organizations normally use a common table of rates)." The second is an "accounting or operational exchange" applied to currencies, and is defined as "The rate that is applied, in the books of the organization, to one currency to determine its equivalent in another currency (all organizations normally use a common table of rates)." Note the phrase "in the books of the organization."

[zeeke]

like to know what you think based on the ecc not being passed why no follow here. why you stated one not to do with the other clearly you felt this ecc would pass to set others in motion

so what up?

Zeeke

[Enorrste]

Wow, quart, you are certainly doing your homework! This is great. Let’s deal with you post together.

I have read all of the links that you gave me. The second leads to the same document as the first, although obviously on a different web site. So I will only have to deal with the first link. The third link, in your second post, is, as you have said, a glossary of terms in which the term “exchange rate” is found twice. I will get to that at the end of this post.

Here is the link again that we are discussing (for others reading):

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2009/gaab3917.doc.htm

I have selected a number of quotes from this long document in an effort to help us clarify the wording of the UN writer.

Specifically two different terms are used: Exchange Rates, and Conversion Rates.

If we can clarify the differences between these two terms we should be able to apply what we learned to the two or three statements regarding Iraq found in this article.

Finally, I am going to number the paragraphs chosen so that we can discuss them more easily. These numbers are NOT in the original document. Also, while these quotes lead sequentially one to the next they are chosen from throughout the document.

1. He said that the Committee had reaffirmed its earlier recommendations with regard to the income measure and conversion rates used in preparing the scale. On the income measure, it had reaffirmed that the most current, comprehensive and comparable data available for gross national income should be used. The Committee had met with representatives of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund to discuss purchasing power parity rates. It had also reaffirmed its earlier recommendation that conversion rates based on market exchange rates should be used in preparing the next scale, except where that would cause excessive fluctuations and distortions in the gross national income of Member States expressed in United States dollars. In that case, price-adjusted rates or other appropriate conversion rates should be used….

2. During its latest session, the Committee on Contributions decided to review the scale for the period 2010-2012, reaffirming its previous recommendation that the scale should be based on the most current, comprehensive and comparable gross national income data available. Also reaffirmed was the recommendation that market exchange rates should be used in preparing the scale, except where that caused excessive fluctuations and distortions in a country’s income….3. The Committee agreed that, once chosen, there were advantages in using the same base period for as long as possible, so as to smooth out over the course of consecutive scale periods the impact for every Member State. It also decided to consider further at future sessions the questions of the debt burden adjustment and the low per-capita income adjustment. Also during the session, the Committee decided to adjust market exchange rates for Iraq and to use United Nations operational rates for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Myanmar and the Syrian Arab Republic.

4. In connection with conversion rates, he said that for 11 countries, a country-by-country assessment of possible exchange rate overvaluation or undervaluation had been conducted, including the examination of information about the economic and financial situation. Based on the review, the Committee had decided to adjust the conversion rate of Iraq. Some members considered that the rate of the other 10 countries should also be adjusted. However, in line with the past practice and its recommendation on the scale methodology, the Committee had decided to use market exchange rates for the other Member States..

OK, now we are ready to discuss what we have here.

In paragraph 1 we see that both terms are used together. This shows us that they clearly have separate meanings. (“It had also reaffirmed its earlier recommendation that conversion rates based on market exchange rates should be used in preparing the next scale, except where that would cause excessive fluctuations and distortions.”)

So we see from this that the market exchange rate exists prior to a conversion rate and that the conversion rate is based on the exchange rate.

In paragraph 2 we see more about exchange rates (“Also reaffirmed was the recommendation that market exchange rates should be used in preparing the scale, except where that caused excessive fluctuations and distortions in a country’s income….”)

Here we see that “market exchange rates” is synonymous with “exchange rates”. From the glossary that you referred to we know that the term means what we commonly understand it to mean, namely the rate that is shown on the Forex charts for any given country, usually posted in terms of dollars.

The statement above says that market exchange rates are the preferred rate to use in determining dues for Member States and that the only exception is where it causes excessive fluctuations in a country’s income.

Now in paragraph 3 we see the use of the term market exchange rate applied to Iraq:

“Also during the session, the Committee decided to adjust market exchange rates for Iraq and to use United Nations operational rates for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Myanmar and the Syrian Arab Republic. “

Notice that in this statement the Committee is separating out Iraq from 4 other countries. In fact it is saying that Iraq will have its “market exchange rate” adjusted, while the other 4 countries will use the “UN operational rates”.

Clearly, whatever the UN operational rates are, they do NOT apply to Iraq. That much is quite clear from this statement.

However, in paragraph 4 we see potential confusion appearing:

“Based on the review, the Committee had decided to adjust the conversion rate of Iraq. Some members considered that the rate of the other 10 countries should also be adjusted. However, in line with the past practice and its recommendation on the scale methodology, the Committee had decided to use market exchange rates for the other Member States.”

Now we are really getting confused, aren’t we. This statement appears to be saying exactly the OPPOSITE of the statement preceding it. Here we see that the Committee has decided to adjust the “conversion rate” of Iraq while leaving 10 other countries to use “market exchange rates”.

How can we unravel this?

(1) We know from the first paragraph that “conversion rates are based on exchange rates.”

(2) We know that the Committee said it was going to adjust Iraq’s exchange rate.

(3) Since the conversion rate is based on the exchange rate, the adjusting of the exchange rate would ALSO adjust the conversion rate.

Therefore we can conclude that the adjusting of the market exchange rate for Iraq is what causes the conversion rate to be adjusted as well.

Furthermore, we can conclude that the methodology used here is to adjust the actual market exchange rate of Iraq and is NOT an internal operating mechanism or a "UN operational rate".

It is possible that the last quote about the 11 other Member States is telling us something more about Iraq. If, as stated above, the Committee is going to adjust the market exchange rate of Iraq, then why would they separate it from the other 11 countries, which are also using the market exchange rate. The reason seems obvious to me: the market exchange rate for Iraq is being adjusted BEFORE the application of the existing market exchange rates for the other 11 countriess. In theory then, for the next payment these countries will have been put in "parity".

This discussion has shown that the actual market exchange rate for Iraq is going to be adjusted by the UN. The UN is still in control of Iraq and has the authority to see that this is done. It is my opinion, therefore, that it will occur before the UN releases Iraq from Chapter VII restrictions, since after release the UN will not have control of Iraq, or the ability to adjust the market exchange rate. Therefore the RV will occur before Chapter VII is released.

Steve

[Quart]

Steve, I think you have won me over. I'll do some more research but, barring any sensational finds, your conclusions seem solid. I'm always looking for the loophole that an entity- person, business or government- might be able to slip through. Thanks for your reasoned discourse!

[Quart]

By the way, I have a document called the International Compact with Iraq, with several annexes that, if you have not seen, you may want to. They are lengthy pdf's so can't be posted here. Let me know if you'd like them.

[Enorrste]

Sure, Quart, we can go through them together if you wish; Just post the link and I will look into it. Take care!

Steve

[Quart]

Steve, I don't remember the site address, but it is either the UN or World Bank, since both of them administer it with the GoI. "Iron sharpens iron." I love this!

[Riley]

Very impressive, thank you to both for sharing your knowledge...

[DSS900]

Steve, I don't remember the site address, but it is either the UN or World Bank, since both of them administer it with the GoI. "Iron sharpens iron." I love this!

Is the site you're referring to Quart?

http://www.uniraq.org/ici.asp

[Quart]

DSS, that's the one. Thanks!

[Island56]

Thank you, this is one of the best posts I've seen to date.

[Quart]

FYI- article on Turkey and water: http://www.greenprophet.com/2009/04/03/8057/turkey-iraq-water/

New water cooperation could be a new beginning for tensions between Turkey and Iraq: Turkey has promised to give neighboring Iraq and Syria a larger share of water from both Tigress and Euphrates rivers; it was announced by Turkish President Abdullah Gul.

Gul, on a state visit to Iraq, the first in 33 years by a Turkish head of state, said that his country will divert more water from these mighty rivers, both of which originate in Turkey.

Turkey undertook a massive project a few years back which included a series of dams on both rivers, to bring more water to its Anatolia region which was then affected by drought.

This created several large reservoirs which seriously reduced to flow of the Tigress into Iraq and the Euphrates into Syria, both of which suffered from severe water shortages for both agriculture and human consumption.

Gul told his Iraqi hosts that due to plentiful rainfall in his country, Turkey can double the amount of water that is allowed to flow into both Syria and Iraq. He explained that the cut back of water had been due to the drought in the previous year, and that now there was a good supply of water in both river systems.

Even in times of drought, Turkey has been blessed with a large amount of annual precipitation which neither Syria nor Iraq enjoy.

[cliffdin10]

What's the significance of this water agreement?

[saphire]

If the UN is in charge of the RV and the US doesn't want M to be elected what is your opinion about how this will play out?

[Stewsday]

Previously, I've followed a Bankers perspective on the Dinar RV and one question still remains: will the $25,000 notes be honored? To honor them, Iraq would, in a sense, be throwing money out the window. They (Iraq) have not profited by permitting US companies to sell them.

While your post makes sense in many ways, does it also make sense that Iraq will honor the $25,000 notes?

[gideonx]

If the UN is in charge of the RV and the US doesn't want M to be elected what is your opinion about how this will play out?

There will not be an RV before election.

Everyone can get back to a normal life for the next 4-6months...............

but is that what IMF and US want?

[JeffInTexas]

Good post. Thanks for the intel

[hymark1]

Thank you for the information you bring to this forum it is greatly appreciated.