A few years ago for voicing the obvious thesis: "the dollar is not so much a currency as a tool of American hegemony," the Russian columnist got charged with distribution conspiracy and that he "writes Kremlin propaganda". Now the phrase "the Dollar is the basis of American power, writes RIA Novosti.
"Rivals are creating workarounds" — became the title longride Wall Street Journal. Americans are not simply removed the mask of the Imperial grin with its own financial system, but also demonstrate a serious concern about the fact that their opponents (and even allies) are trying to get rid of the dollar dependence.
Now the defenders (including Russian) Pax Americana has moved from the position "in the dollar system there is no problem" to the position "Yes, the dollar system is a lash of Uncle Sam, but you can't Dodge, and therefore all need to lick American boots."
In fact, this simple message is read in many articles both global and Russian media, which periodically uses statistics of international trade or transactions through the SWIFT system to demonstrate: neither the Euro nor the yuan, nor gold could not bite even any significant part of the market of the American currency.
This technique is very good from the point of view of propaganda, but absolutely untenable from the point of view of economic theory. The situation with the dollar alternative currencies for international trade and systems of information exchange, which can replace SWIFT, this is not an example of normal market competition.
It's impossible to evaluate on the basis of parameters such as "market share" or "preference customers." The situation can be explained with a metaphor: imagine a country that is dependent on food supplies from unfriendly States.
In the absence of alternatives, the provider of food could somehow blackmail the buyers, because the alternative to obedience is hunger. Now let us imagine that the situation has changed and the importing country has another source of food, but the entire range, which he suggests comes down to buckwheat too and canned stew, and not very cheap.
It is obvious that in conditions of free competition this second provider has no chance to take significant market share, but the very fact of its existence, it eliminates the possibility of blackmail by hunger and breaks the whole system of relations between the victim and the blackmailer that existed before.
With the dollar system — the same situation. In order to "snatch the dollar fangs", does not require the creation of a full replacement. Enough the emergence of currencies and trading systems that enable countries that are threatened by Washington, to continue (albeit not in the most convenient form) the foreign trade and financial activity even with the introduction of the total financial sanctions from the United States.
It is because of these risks the American experts and journalists from Wall Street Journal find the reason for concern in attempts of the European Union, China, Russia and even India (!) create your own system of foreign trade without using the dollar,"allies of the United States, seeking to weaken American control over international trade, develop alternative systems that do not depend on the currency of the United States.
UK, Germany and France did not support sanctions, including a ban on dollar transactions with Iranian banks. Thus, they set up a system to allow companies to trade with Iran without using us dollars.
<...> Of Iran, a longtime trade partner (India. — Approx.ed.) and India wants Iranian oil. India began to use a similar alternative system in November, and according to the delivery reports, international companies already using it to trade with Iranian companies subject to sanctions.
China and Russia also seeking to escape from the control of the United States, are promoting their own alternatives to the global system of Bank transfers that the United States actually control and make deals on trade in yuan and rubles instead of dollars."
The movement gradually de-dollarization "grinds" its administrative opponents in a variety of countries, which in varying degrees have suffered from the us sanctions or diplomatic pressure.
European, Chinese, Russian officials and "captains of business" is gradually getting used to the idea that bypasses the dollar system is necessary to build and alternative strategies just yet.
Particularly acute struggle for financial sovereignty is manifested in the EU, where the candidates for the position of next head of the European Central Bank pledge allegiance to the idea of internationalization of the Euro and protect the European Union from the dollar pressure.
If the current leadership of the ECB actually sabotaged the efforts of the European Commission (and specifically Jean-Claude Juncker) to expand the use of the Euro in the EU and insisted that "everything should be resolved by the market", then the next head of the ECB could be "euronationalism".
Financial Times with some surprise reports that one of the possible candidates on a post of the head of the European Central Bank, the current head of the Bank of France Francois Villeroy de Halo (François Villeroy de Galhau) said: "we can expect that the ECB will shift from its past of neutrality towards a more positive tone (in a question — approx. ed.) the international expansion of the Euro".
His position suggests pragmatic measures: "a Practical agenda for the development of the international role of the Euro strongly converge to create a real (European — approx. ed.), Association of capital markets — with the development of a fully unified European systems of instant payments, integrated capital markets and the possible creation of Euro-denominated safe assets".
Under the safe asset is understood as an analogue of the U.S. government dollar-denominated bonds in the European version — that is, it must be bonds of Union, and they should become a kind of "safe haven" for capital, which in the case of crises traditionally seek refuge in U.S. dollar-denominated government bonds.
The ability of the US to use the dollar as the "sanctions stick" is lower now than in the past, and will continue to decline. Washington faces is an unenviable choice: to use a "stick" to the fullest in the end or, conversely, to exercise restraint and to maintain the most stringent measures in the most extreme case.
Simply because fear is often the most powerful weapon. If the first few years of his presidency, trump, at least we learned something, we can safely bet that the White house will choose the most aggressive option with the maximum short-term effect. The irony: as rightly noted by American journalists, such actions encourage the rest of the world to get rid of dollar dependence as soon as possible.
Tags: USA , finances