SWIFT is currently the most important global payment instruction messaging system, but it is not the case that without SWIFT cross-border economic transactions absolutely cannot be carried out. The disconnection of services by SWIFT is itself not a fundamental issue. The real concern is the possible impact that could be generated by the U.S.-European camp implementing severe economic sanctions or even fully decoupling.
SWIFT 是目前全球最重要的支付指令报文体系,但并不是离开SWIFT,跨国经济往来就绝对没有办法进行。被SWIFT切断服务本身并不是根本问题,真正需要关注的问题是被美欧阵营实施严厉的经济制裁甚至与其全面脱钩可能产生的影响。
On February 26 (U.S. time), the White House issued a joint statement by the leaders of the European Union, the United States, and Canada on their decision to ensure the removal of selected Russian banks from the SWIFT information system. (Note that this was not the removal of all Russian banks registered with SWIFT). This has been interpreted by many as: The United States and Europe have used a “financial nuclear bomb,” a “financial killer” that will shut down Russia’s foreign trade and international financial transactions, causing a devastating blow to Russia’s economic development and social stability.
美国时间2月26日,美国白宫宣布其与欧盟、美国、加拿大领导人的联合声明,决定确保将选定的俄罗斯银行从“环球银行同业金融电讯协会(SWIFT)”的信息系统删除(注意,这里还不是将所有在SWIFT注册的俄罗斯银行全部删除)。这被很多人解释为:美欧已经对俄罗斯启用“金融核弹”、“金融杀手锏”,将全面封杀俄罗斯的对外贸易与国际金融交易,对俄罗斯的经济发展和社会稳定将造成毁灭性打击。
This still needs to be scrutinized carefully.
对此还需要仔细推敲。
First, it should be clear that SWIFT is only a part of the international payment settlement system, not all of it
一、首先需要明确的是,SWIFT只是国际支付清算体系中的一部分,而并非全部
The components of the international payment settlement system include settlement currency selection, payment instruction messaging systems, settlement funds account systems, and the actual processing of payment settlement. SWIFT is only one of the payment instruction messaging systems.
国际支付清算体系包括支付清算货币选择、支付指令报文体系、清算资金账户体系、支付清算实际处理等组成部分,SWIFT只是其中的支付指令报文体系。
Settlement currency selection: When economic transactions occur between countries with different currencies, it is necessary to first determine the currency of denomination and settlement for the economic transactions. This may be the currency of the party in the economic transaction with the stronger voice, or it may be another country’s currency that is more internationalized. It is through an extensive global selection process that the relative shares or statuses of different countries’ currencies in international payments and foreign exchange reserves are formed. Behind this selection is a comparison of the overall national power and international influence of different countries, and only the currency of the country with the strongest international influence can become the most dominant international currency (international hard currency). At present, the dollar is the number one international currency. Its share of international payments is around 40%, and its share in international foreign exchange reserves is around 60%. The euro ranks second. Its share of international payments is close to 40%, and its share in international foreign exchange reserves is around 25%. Other national currencies lag far behind the dollar and euro.
支付清算货币选择:拥有不同货币的国家之间发生经济往来,首先需要确定经济往来的计价与清算货币。这可能是经济往来中话语权更强一方的货币,也可能是更具国际化的他国货币。在全球广泛的选择过程中,就形成了不同国家的货币在国际支付和外汇储备中的份额或地位。这种选择的背后,则是不同国家综合国力和国际影响力的比较,只有国际影响力最为强大国家的货币才能成为最主要的国际货币(国际硬通货)。目前,美元是头号国际货币,其在国际支付这份额在40%上下,在国际外汇储备中的份额在60%上下;欧元排名第二,其在国际支付这份额接近40%,在国际外汇储备中的份额在25%左右。其他国家货币则远远落后于美元和欧元。
Payment instruction messaging system: When economic transactions between countries occur, it is necessary for the payer to issue a payment instruction to its clearing institution (a bank in which it has an account). The clearing institution then deducts the payment accordingly and transfers it to the recipient’s account at the recipient’s bank, or reduces its own deposit in the recipient’s bank and issues a payment notice to the recipient’s bank. After the recipient’s bank receives the instruction, it registers an increase of its own deposit in the payer’s bank or a reduction of the payer’s deposit in its own bank, at the same time transferring the amount to the account of the recipient, and sends a notice of receipt of payment to the recipient. So, to realize cross-border settlement, it is necessary to connect the payment instruction message specification and processing systems of each country. Since different countries have different languages, different legal systems, and different time standards, it would be very troublesome and uneconomical if each country were to establish independent payment instruction messaging systems with other countries, and the high cost and low efficiency of doing so might even hinder the development of mutual economic transactions. At present, SWIFT is the most widely used payment instruction messaging system in the world.
支付指令报文体系:发生经济往来的国家之间要进行实际的支付清算,需要由付款方向其清算机构(开户银行)发出支付指令,清算机构据以扣减其支付的款项,同时转入收款方开户银行的账户或减少自己在收款方开户银行的存款,并向收款方开户银行发出支付通知;收款方开户银行收到指令后,登记增加自己在付款方开户银行的存款或扣减付款方在本银行的存款,同时转入收款方的账户,并向收款方发出收妥款项的通知。所以,要实现跨国支付清算,就需要连接各国的支付指令报文规范和处理体系。用于不同国家的语言文字不同、法律体系不同、时间标准不同等等,如果每个国家都分别与其他国家建立独立的支付指令报文体系,是非常麻烦和不经济的,其高成本、低效率甚至会阻碍相互之间经济往来的开展,能够搭建全球标准统一、安全共享、便捷高效的支付指令报文体系才是最佳选择。目前,SWIFT就是全球用户最为广泛的支付指令报文体系。
Payment funds account system: International payment settlement involves the opening of funds accounts at clearing institutions and having sufficient balance of funds (including overdraft limit) to ensure the funds needed to settle payment. Because international payment settlement may involve multiple international currencies, clearing institutions are required to open many settlement accounts in banks of many countries and strengthen the management of settlement account funds (positions). Since international payment settlement involves different currencies, languages, etc., it is far more complex than domestic settlement in a single domestic currency and language. In order to prevent international payment settlement from negatively affecting their domestic settlement systems, many countries have established a relatively independent international payment settlement account system, forming a risk isolation wall while maintaining certain financial links with the domestic payment settlement system. For example, within the United States there is the Fedwire U.S. dollar system, whereas the cross-border system is CHIPS. Within China there is the High-Value Payment System (HVPS) for real-time settlement in renminbi (RMB), whereas for cross-border settlement there is the Cross-border Interbank Payment System (CIPS). The payment settlement account system in each country has strong sovereignty attributes and needs to be subject to close supervision by the country where it is located. Worldwide, the final payment settlement account for a country’s currency is in the country whose currency it is (the final payment settlement account for the U.S. dollar is CHIPS, the final payment settlement account for the RMB is CIPS, and so on) because the supply of a currency is ultimately controlled by the country that issues it.
支付资金账户体系:国际支付清算,涉及到清算机构资金账户的开立并拥有足够的资金余额(包括透支限额)以保证支付清算的资金需要。由于国际支付清算可能涉及多种国际货币,需要清算机构在很多国家的银行开立很多的清算账户,并加强清算账户资金(头寸)管理。由于国际支付清算涉及不同的币种、文字等,远比国内单一的货币、文字更复杂,为规避国际支付清算对国内支付清算体系的影响,很多国家都建立相对独立的国际支付清算账户体系,形成风险隔离墙,并与国内支付清算体系保持一定的资金联系。比如,美国境内是美元体系Fedwire,跨境的是Chips。中国境内是人民币大额实时支付清算体系HVPS,跨境清算的是CIPS。各国支付清算账户体系具有很强的主权特征,需要接受所在国家的严密监管。世界范围内,各国货币最终的支付清算账户都在其本国(美元最终的支付清算账户是CHIPS;人民币最终的支付清算账户是CIPS;如此等等),因为货币的供应,最终是由货币发行国管控的。
It needs to be clarified that systems such as CHIPS and CIPS are first and foremost funds account systems. They are primarily for the currencies of their respective countries, and what they mainly resolve are the “flows of funds” of international settlements. This is not the same as being able to completely replace the payment instruction messaging system. They basically have to connect with SWIFT in order to complete international payment settlement business. SWIFT is a payment instruction messaging system. SWIFT itself does not involve the funds accounts of member units, and it mainly resolves the “information flows” of international payment settlement.
需要明确的是,CHIPS、CIPS等主要是资金账户体系,并且主要是其本国货币资金账户体系,主要解决的是国际支付清算的“资金流”,并不等于可以完全替代支付指令报文体系,它们基本上还需要与SWIFT连接才能完成国际支付清算业务。而SWIFT属于支付指令报文体系,本身并不涉及到成员单位的资金账户,主要解决的是国际支付清算的“信息流”。
Actual processing of payment settlement: To settle the payment in a cross-border economic transaction, it is necessary to determine the specific clearing institution and settlement account, thereby determining the specific path for settlement instruction transmission and processing. The clearing institution carries out settlement account processing accordingly and deducts from the payer’s deposit. The processing is not considered completed until the transfer is made to the recipient’s account. If there is any problem, error finding and handling will still need to be carried out.
支付清算实际处理:对一笔跨国经济往来的支付清算,需要确定具体的清算机构和清算账户,由此确定清算指令发送和处理的具体路径,清算机构相应进行清算账户处理,扣减付款方存款,并最终转入收款方账户后才算完成。如果出现问题,还要进行差错查找和处理。
One can see from the foregoing that SWIFT, as the infrastructure for the standard formulation of payment instruction messages and for transmitting and processing instructions, is a very important link in international payment settlement, but it is only one of the links, not the whole of international payment settlement. Also, although SWIFT is currently the most important global payment instruction messaging system, it is not the case that cross-border economic transactions absolutely cannot be carried out without SWIFT. In fact, SWIFT was announced only in 1973, and it took a long time for it to become a payment instruction messaging system with global coverage. Cross-border economic transactions also existed before there was SWIFT. It is only that the development of cross-border economic exchanges was better facilitated after the emergence of SWIFT. Likewise, when the Soviet Union and the United States were sharply opposed to each other and it was hard for the Eastern socialist camp to obtain SWIFT services, its internal transnational economic transactions still existed. The currency of the most powerful country in the camp could be chosen as the currency for denomination and settlement, with payments settled by means of encrypted telegrams, mail, etc. Even the necessity of settling payments one by one was obviated by adopting “bookkeeping settlement,” that is, within the scope of an agreement, the economic transactions occurring between the two sides were first entered in their account books, then differences were periodically (e.g., annually) aggregated, and settlement was only carried out on the balance. If a country is excluded by SWIFT now, that country can still imitate SWIFT’s messaging rules and establish a new payment instruction messaging system with other countries for settling economic transaction payments over the internet and other channels, which is not difficult technically, though its cost of operation and efficiency might not be comparable to those of SWIFT. So, describing SWIFT as a “financial nuclear bomb or killer app” is in fact a bit of an exaggeration.
由上可知,SWIFT作为支付指令报文标准制定和指令传送与处理的基础设施,在国际支付清算中属于非常重要的一环,但也只是其中的一个环节,并不是国际支付清算的全部。同时,SWIFT 是目前全球最重要的支付指令报文体系,但并不是离开SWIFT,跨国经济往来就绝对没有办法进行。实际上,SWIFT于1973年才宣告成立,并且经过很长时间才成为覆盖全球的支付指令报文体系,在没有SWIFT之前,跨国经济往来同样存在,只是在SWIFT出现后,更好地促进了跨国经济往来的发展。同样,在苏联和美国尖锐对立,东方社会主义阵营难以得到SWIFT 服务的情况下,其内部跨国间的经济往来依然存在,可以选择本阵营最强大国家的货币作为计价清算货币,并通过加密电报、邮件等进行支付清算,甚至无需逐笔进行支付清算,而是采取“记账清算”方式,即在协议范围内,对发生的经济往来采取双方先记账,定期(如每年)再进行汇总轧差,只对余额进行清算等。现在,如果一国被SWIFT踢除,这个国家仍然可以模仿SWIFT的报文规则,通过互联网等渠道与其他国家建立新的支付指令报文体系进行经济往来的支付清算,在技术上并不是难题,只是其运行成本和效率可能无法与SWIFT相比。所以,把SWIFT说成是“金融核弹或杀手锏”,其实是有点夸张。
Second, what needs to be clarified even more are the relationships between payment settlement and economic transactions, and between cutting off SWIFT and the implementation of economic sanctions
二、更需要明确的是支付清算与经济往来、切断SWIFT与实施经济制裁的关系
Payment settlement is for economic transactions. If there were no transnational economic transactions, there would be no need for international payment settlement. Safe, efficient, and convenient settlement of international payments actively promotes the development of transnational economic transactions. Blocking the use of SWIFT will also have a profound impact on the development of a country’s foreign economic transactions, but blocking the use of SWIFT is only a means of economic sanctioning. The prerequisite for cutting off a country from the SWIFT information system is that the United States and Europe impose severe economic sanctions on the country. Without economic sanctions, the United States and Europe unilaterally blocking the SWIFT connection to Russia would also block their economic transactions with the country. Therefore, the economic sanctions against Russia by the U.S.-European camp are the main role, while cutting off SWIFT services is only a supporting role, and that order cannot be reversed.
支付清算是为经济往来服务的,没有跨国经济往来,也就不需要国际支付清算;安全高效便捷的国际支付清算,会积极促进跨国经济往来的发展;阻断SWIFT的使用,也会对一国发展对外经济往来产生很大影响,但阻断SWIFT的使用,只是经济制裁的一种手段,对一国切断SWIFT的信息系统,前提是美欧对该国实施严厉的经济制裁,没有经济制裁,美欧单方面阻断SWIFT对俄的连接,也会使其对该国的经济往来受阻。所以,美欧阵营对俄的经济制裁才是主角,切断SWIFT服务只是配角,不能将主次颠倒。
Hence, the widely circulated statement that “Iran lost nearly half of its oil export revenue and a large amount of foreign trade as a result of the United States push to cut off the SWIFT connection to Iran in 2012” is actually putting the cart before the horse. The fundamental reason for the significant reduction in Iran’s oil exports and other foreign trade was that the United States and Europe had imposed a severe blockade on Iran’s oil exports and other foreign trade, including their own cut-off of Iranian oil imports, not simply because SWIFT had cut off the connection to Iran.
由此,那种广泛流传的“2012年美国推动SWIFT切断对伊朗的连接,导致伊朗损失了近一半的石油出口收入和大量的对外贸易”的说法实际上是本末倒置,伊朗石油出口等对外贸易大幅减少的根本原因是美欧等对伊朗石油出口等对外贸易进行严厉封锁,包括其自身断绝进口伊朗石油,而不是单纯的因为SWIFT切断对伊朗的连接。
SWIFT is currently registered in Belgium and is mainly under the control of the European Union. At the same time, the United States has a major influence on it because the U.S. dollar occupies the most important position in international payments, so the EU and the United States together have decisive control over SWIFT. The announcement by the United States and Europe on removing selected Russian banks from SWIFT, and possibly even completely cutting off all Russian banks from SWIFT, means that those Russian banks will not be able to use the SWIFT infrastructure. Once the United States, the EU, Britain, and Canada announce the complete removal of Russian banks from SWIFT, it will also mean that these countries will be completely cut off from economic dealings with Russia, and it will also make it difficult for other countries to handle payment settlement with Russia through SWIFT. If other countries want to have economic dealings with Russia, they will have to establish a separate payment instruction transmission system with Russia, but they will also face the risk of being sanctioned by the U.S.-European camp. The U.S.-European camp has announced that it will also take action against those people and entities that provide facilitation to the Russia-Ukraine war and the Russian government. That is, they require other countries to control or cut off their economic dealings with Russia, which will force other countries to choose sides, either the camp with the United States, Europe, and other developed countries, or Russia. This would have a major impact not only on Russia, but it would also create a significant trade-off of interests for the many countries that have substantial amounts of economic dealings both with Russia and with the United States and Europe. If you choose Russia, you may offend or even break away from the U.S.-European camp and face the prospect of developed countries severing economic contacts, imposing advanced technology blockades, and blocking personnel exchanges, which would cause great harm to your own economic and social development. If you choose to join the U.S.-Europe-developed countries camp, you will thus cut off economic contacts with Russia. Since Russia is a major world exporter of energy, food, and minerals, as well as a permanent member of the United Nations [Security Council] with international influence, blocking Russia’s foreign trade and financial transactions would also have an impact on the international prices of related products and on global production and supply chains and financial markets, in addition to the impact on Europe’s current energy crisis and on the greater-than-expected inflation in the United States. If this causes SWIFT to cut off service to many countries that maintain trading and funds transactions with Russia, it will also give rise to alternatives to SWIFT, accelerate the internationalization of other currencies, and have a profound impact on SWIFT’s business development and the development of the U.S.-European camp’s foreign economic relations, as well as on the international circulation and international status of currencies such as the U.S. dollar and the euro. If this were to propel a serious division in the world and the formation of two sharply opposing camps, it would also pose a great threat to the development of economic globalization and to world peace and stability.
目前,SWIFT注册在比利时,主要受欧盟的控制,同时因美元在国际支付中占据最重要的位置,美国对其影响也很大,所以,欧盟与美国联合,就对SWIFT具有决定性控制力。美欧宣布将选定的俄罗斯银行从SWIFT中删除,甚至有可能完全切断俄罗斯所有银行与SWIFT的连接,意味着这些俄罗斯银行将不能使用SWIFT这一基础设施。而美欧英加等一旦宣布将俄罗斯银行彻底剔除SWIFT,也意味着这些国家将全面断绝与俄罗斯的经济往来,而且也使得其他国家难以通过SWIFT办理与俄罗斯的支付清算。其他国家要与俄罗斯发生经济往来,只能另外建立与俄罗斯的支付指令传送体系,但也面临被美欧阵营制裁的风险。美欧阵营已宣布还将对那些为俄国乌克兰战争和俄罗斯政府提供便利的人和实体采取行动,即要求其他国家控制或断绝与俄罗斯的经济往来,这就会逼迫其他国家在美欧等发达国家阵营与俄罗斯之间选边站队。这不仅会对俄罗斯产生很大影响,而且也会对很多与美欧及俄罗斯都存在较大经济往来的国家产生重大的利益权衡问题。如果选择俄罗斯,就可能得罪甚至脱离美欧阵营,面临着发达国家断绝经济往来、封锁先进技术、阻断人员交流等,给自己的经济社会发展带来很大伤害。如果选择与美欧发达国家阵营为伍,就会因此而断绝与俄罗斯的经济往来,由于俄罗斯是世界上能源、粮食、矿产等出口大国,也是具有国际影响力的联合国常任理事国,封锁俄罗斯的对外贸易与金融交易,也会对相关产品的国际价格产生冲击,对全球产业链供应链及金融市场产生影响,包括对欧洲目前的能源危机,以及美国超出预期的通货膨胀等产生影响。如果由此引发SWIFT切断对很多与俄罗斯保持交易与资金往来国家的服务,也会催生对SWIFT的替代品,加快其他货币的国际化,对SWIFT的业务开拓以及美欧阵营对外经济往来的发展,对美元、欧元等货币的国际流通与国际地位产生深刻影响;如果由此推动世界严重分裂,形成尖锐对立的两大阵营,也会对经济全球化发展,对世界和平稳定产生极大威胁。
Thus, the disconnection of services by SWIFT is itself not a fundamental issue. The real concern is the possible impact of the U.S. and European camps implementing severe economic sanctions or even fully decoupling. Looking at the possible repercussions of SWIFT’s exclusion of Russia, it is important to see not only the impact on Russia but also the possible broader impact on the world economic and political landscape.
所以,被SWIFT切断服务本身并不是根本问题,真正需要关注的问题是被美欧阵营实施严厉的经济制裁甚至与其全面脱钩可能产生的影响。观察SWIFT将俄罗斯剔除可能产生的影响,不能仅仅看到对俄罗斯的影响,更要看到可能对世界经济和政治格局的广泛影响。