This focus is appropriate. Like other central banks, our monetary policy mandate concerns domestic objectives: maximum sustainable employment and price stability. Our monetary policy actions, however, often have global consequences that, in turn, influence the U.S. economy and financial markets. At the same time, external factors can impact the monetary policy transmission mechanism in the U.S. and influence the effectiveness of our monetary policy in achieving our objectives. We cannot appropriately calibrate policy without keeping these spillover and feedback effects in mind. In some cases, these effects can be significant. An example is the market volatility we saw in the spring and summer of 2013 during the so-called “taper tantrum.” In the U.S., we saw a spike in Treasury yields, with the 10-year rate rising by more than 100 basis points from early May of that year before peaking in September. Financial markets in emerging market economies (EME) were hit hard as well, with declines in equity prices, a widening in sovereign debt spreads and a sharp increase in foreign exchange volatility. Volatility in EME financial markets re-emerged last summer and has continued into this year. For EMEs as a group, declines in equity prices and currency values have been larger than what we experienced during the taper tantrum. The recent episode, however, appears to largely reflect concerns about risks emanating from EMEs themselves, rather than concerns about the direction of Fed policy. Three related concerns appear to be at the forefront. First, there has been a broad-based slowdown in EME growth.
In short, given the current conjuncture, the avoidance of excessive borrowing both by the public and private sector; preference of longer maturities in all borrowings, opting to borrow in TL as much as possible and managing risks efficiently will considerably strengthen the resilience of Turkish economy against external shocks. The monetary policy adopted by the Central Bank is composed in a way to make price stability and financial stability complementary. In this context, I would like to evaluate how the CBRT will use policy tools in the upcoming period within the framework of possible scenarios provided in the inflation reports. As also demonstrated on the slide, the current conjuncture supports the CBRT’s stance of keeping policy rates constant for some time, and at low levels for a long period. On the other hand, developments in the aggregate demand composition necessitated that instruments other than the policy rate be brought to pre-crisis levels. In this respect, we have largely completed the exit strategy measures that we announced in April 2010. 2  BIS Review 174/2010  In the October Inflation Report, we stated that our baseline scenario was based on an outlook where domestic demand is stronger compared to the previous reporting period, external demand continues to restrain economic activity, and thus aggregate demand conditions continue to support disinflation, albeit to a lesser degree.