Russia's Strategic Priorities in the Global Monetary System from the Point of View of Ensuring Foreign Economic Security
Authors: Malykh E. B. , Pakhomov V. I. 
Published: May 2020

The presented study analyzes the reasons for the need to move away from the US dollar (hereinafter referred to as the dollar) as a universal means of payment in international trade based on the existing threats, examines alternative means of international payments, and identifies their benefits and drawbacks in the context of Russia’s economic security.

Aim. The study aims to identify and characterize the means of international payments that fall in line with Russia’s strategic priorities from the perspective of economic security.

Tasks. The author considers the risks of using the dollar in international payments and reserves, assesses various means of international payments from the perspective of Russia’s strategic interests, and evaluates the possibility of substituting the dollar with alternative means of international payments.

Methods. This study analyzes information from the International Economic Forums, statistics of the Central Bank of Russia, Federal State Statistics Service, Decree of the President of the Russian Federation on the economic security strategy of the Russian Federation until 2030, reports of news agencies, and works of Russian and foreign authors on the subject.

Results. Based on the results of the conducted study, the author draws several conclusions. Due to many factors, the most important of them being the volume of trade in dollars, the dollar will remain the world’s leading currency in international trade. However, given that de-dollarization is a global process, the existing trends will amplify. A supranational currency is unlikely to appear for a number of reasons. First, the obvious opposition of the United States due to its unwillingness to let go of such a powerful lever of economic well-being and political influence as the use of the dollar as a global means of payment. The US would probably agree to creating a supranational currency in the medium term if the global process of de-dollarization reaches critical values. Second, the financial and trade centers of the euro and renminbi area are likely to focus on developing their own currencies, especially given the growing global GDP and China’s trade. Creating a supranational currency based on the existing structure of the International monetary Fund (hereinafter — the IMF), following the example of Special Drawing Rights (SDR), with the IMF virtually controlled by the United States, will not eliminate the threat of the currency being used as an instrument of political pressure on individual countries. Replacing the dollar with such kind of supranational currency does not serve the interests of Russia’s economic security. A potential alternative involves creating a supranational currency based on a structure that is independent of the IMF. In this case, the obstacles would include the obvious opposition of the US and its allies and the potential influence of the US on the emission of the supranational currency using its foreign political resources to affect the decisions made by other countries. Using national currencies in international trade in the medium term under the influence of globalization would lead to a formation of multiple currency centers. These centers would most likely be the dollar, euro, renminbi, and ruble.

Conclusions. The creation of a ruble-based International Monetary Center with the CIS, BRIC countries (except China), and Turkey serves Russia’s strategic interests. Further consolidation around the ruble would require implementing a financial sustainability policy, maintaining the stability of the macroeconomic environment, creating an international bank similar to the IMF with payments made in rubles, strengthening offshore ruble areas, and increasing high-tech exports.