By preventing Russia's central bank from accessing the country's foreign-exchange reserves, the West has effectively seized Vladimir Putin's war chest. And even in the face of this awesome display of Western power, alternatives to the dollar-dominated monetary system will not be forthcoming.
      
    
    
      The savage fighting in Ukraine has led many to wonder whether Russian 
President Vladimir Putin’s supposed strategic brilliance is all that it 
was chalked up to be. Though Putin anticipated that NATO wouldn’t 
respond militarily to his war, he seems to have underestimated the 
West’s capacity for solidarity. The United States and its allies and 
partners have already implemented unprecedently severe economic and 
financial sanctions against Putin’s regime, and the decision to block 
Russia’s central bank from international financial markets (effectively 
freezing the country’s foreign-exchange reserves) is arguably a 
masterstroke.
True, Russia has diversified its reserves 
away from the dollar in recent years. But judging by the scale of the 
international response and its immediate impact on the Russian economy, 
this strategy appears to have been insufficient to maintain access to 
the financing it needs. Even Switzerland has announced
 that it will participate in the new sanctions regime by freezing 
Russian assets. Unless Russia has considerable reserves held in Chinese 
renminbi or currencies issued by other countries that still support it, 
the squeeze on its economy will be unavoidable.  Whatever Russia’s 
response, the question now is what these moves by the West – and by 
almost all the world’s financial centers – will mean for future monetary
 affairs and the international monetary system. 
Are we witnessing a 
further consolidation of US power through the dollar-dominated system, 
or will this episode set the stage for the kind of monetary and 
financial fragmentation that some analysts have long anticipated?  Having written
 about the future of the dollar myself, I cannot recall a previous 
policy announcement that raised the global monetary stakes as much as 
this one has. The immediate effect of the Russia sanctions has been to 
highlight the US’ continued dominance. But it also may force many 
emerging economies to reconsider the textbook approach to building up 
foreign-exchange reserves to protect against economic crises. The need 
for such self-insurance was the big lesson from the 1997-98 Asian 
financial crisis. But now that Russia’s central bank has lost the 
ability to convert its foreign currencies into rubles, the strategy 
would appear to come with some new risks.  This is particularly true for
 countries whose aspirations might run afoul of the Western democratic 
world’s prevailing norms – as threatening and then invading a smaller 
neighbor obviously does. It doesn’t take a deep thinker to appreciate 
that China must be alarmed and displeased by the audacity of both 
Russia’s war and the Western reaction to it. If China were to pursue 
military action against Taiwan, it, too, could expect to lose much of 
its access to the global financial system.  One can see why escaping 
this deep dependency on the Western-controlled currency system might now
 become a top priority for some countries. If renminbi, rubles, Indian 
rupees, and other currencies were more convertible for other countries, a
 fundamentally different international monetary system could emerge – 
one in which the kinds of sanctions being imposed on Russia would not be
 so effective. But this scenario remains unlikely, for two related 
reasons. 
 First, 
there is a reason why China has not done more to elevate the renminbi as
 an international currency. At the many conferences on the global 
monetary order that I have attended, the message from Chinese scholars 
has long been clear: Their preferred method for improving the current 
system is to expand the role of special drawing rights, the 
International Monetary Fund’s reserve asset. 
 This makes sense when 
one considers what internationalizing the renminbi would entail. Because
 China would need to allow much greater freedom in the offshore use of 
its currency, it would have to give up its ability to maintain capital 
controls. So far, it has been unwilling to do this. Yet, without 
capital-account liberalization, no other country – not even one as 
financially desperate as Russia – would want to hold its reserves in 
renminbi.  Second, even if a major power like China were to respond to 
today’s changing circumstances by pursuing major financial reforms, it 
would still have to offer credible assurances regarding the safety and 
liquidity of reserves held outside Western currencies. Otherwise, why 
would anyone take the risk?  Again, China seems unlikely to pursue any 
reforms that would require radical changes to its own economic and 
regulatory model. If China did bite the bullet and open its financial 
system, structural changes in the global monetary order would almost 
certainly follow. But, even in that case, the changes would not happen 
in time to spare Russia the consequences of its president’s appalling 
behavior. 
Project Syndicate
      
      
      
      
        © Project Syndicate
     
      
      
      
      
      
      Key
      
 Hover over the blue highlighted
        text to view the acronym meaning
      

Hover
        over these icons for more information
      
      
     
    
    
      
      Comments:
      
      No Comments for this Article