• Commentary
  • Research
  • Experts
  • Events
Carnegie China logoCarnegie lettermark logo
{
  "authors": [
    "Uri Dadush"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Europe"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Transatlantic Cooperation",
    "Brexit and UK Politics"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Western Europe",
    "United Kingdom",
    "France",
    "Germany",
    "Europe"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Economy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

The U.S.' Eurozone Problem

The economies of the United States and Europe are tightly linked via trade, investment, and financial markets. If the Euro crisis spreads, U.S. banking and export sectors will suffer.

Link Copied
By Uri Dadush
Published on May 14, 2010

Source: Council on Foreign Relations

The U.S.' Eurozone ProblemThe United States has a vital interest in assuring that the euro crisis is controlled. The EU represents 20 percent of U.S. exports. More than 50 percent of U.S. overseas assets are held in Europe, while close to 40 percent of Europe's foreign assets invested in the United States.

In fact, the euro crisis has already had a significant impact on the U.S. economy: Since late November, the euro has lost 17 percent of its value vis-à-vis the dollar, making U.S. exports less competitive, even as the Obama administration's goal is to double exports in five years. U.S. exports are also adversely affected by Europe's sluggish recovery--in the first quarter, European GDP was up only 0.3 percent on the same quarter a year before, compared to a 2.5 percent rise in the United States and 11.9 percent in China. U.S. investors in Europe should expect to take large balance sheet and income translation losses due to the lower euro.

But the most important effects of the euro crisis on the United States will operate not through the real channels of trade and foreign direct investment, but through broader effects on confidence and banks. Stock market volatility (as measured by the VIX index) has more than doubled in the last two months, and the confidence that banks have in lending to each other--measured by the TED spread (the difference between three-month inter-bank lending rate and the yield on Treasury Bills) was as wide as 30.8 basis points at the end of last week, a nine-month high, up from this year's low of 10.6 basis points in March.

This is against a backdrop of a crisis largely confined thus far to Greece, a country accounting for a mere 2.6 percent of the eurozone GDP. Imagine what would happen if the crisis spread to Spain or Italy, countries five or six times larger. Though the exposure of U.S. banks to the most vulnerable countries in Europe is limited--about $176 billion, or 5 percent of their total foreign exposure--the indirect exposure is much larger, since U.S. banks do business with all the large international banks, which are themselves exposed to these vulnerable countries.

A spreading euro crisis would hurt U.S. interests in another way.  Although U.S. government debt may increase in popularity initially due to a safe haven effect, a spreading crisis would likely eventually place the spotlight on rising U.S. debt as well, aggravating the country's unstable debt dynamics.

Originally published by the Council on Foreign Relations, May 14, 2010

About the Author

Uri Dadush

Former Senior Associate, International Economics Program

Dadush was a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He focuses on trends in the global economy and is currently tracking developments in the eurozone crisis.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    The Labors of Tsipras

      Uri Dadush

  • In The Media
    Greece, Complacency, and the Euro

      Uri Dadush

Uri Dadush
Former Senior Associate, International Economics Program
Uri Dadush
EconomyNorth AmericaUnited StatesWestern EuropeUnited KingdomFranceGermanyEurope

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie China

  • Commentary
    When It Comes to Superpower Geopolitics, Malaysia Is Staunchly Nonpartisan

    For Malaysia, the conjunction that works is “and” not “or” when it comes to the United States and China.

      Elina Noor

  • Commentary
    Today’s Rare Earths Conflict Echoes the 1973 Oil Crisis — But It’s Not the Same

    Regulation, not embargo, allows Beijing to shape how other countries and firms adapt to its terms.

      Alvin Camba

  • Commentary
    How China’s Growth Model Determines Its Climate Performance

    Rather than climate ambitions, compatibility with investment and exports is why China supports both green and high-emission technologies.

      Mathias Larsen

  • Overproduction in China
    Commentary
    What’s New about Involution?

    “Involution” is a new word for an old problem, and without a very different set of policies to rein it in, it is a problem that is likely to persist.

      Michael Pettis

  • Commentary
    The Chinese Investment Riddle: What Cities Reveal

    While China's investment story seems contradictory from the outside, the real answers to Beijing's high-quality growth ambitions are hiding in plain sight across the nation's cities.

      Yuhan Zhang

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
Carnegie China logo, white
Keck Seng Tower133 Cecil Street #10-01ASingapore, 069535
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.