Monetary Systems
Analysis and Summary
This document is a remarkably candid insider critique by Paulo Nogueira Batista Jr., a Brazilian economist who served as Vice President of the New Development Bank (2015-2017) and IMF Executive Director for Brazil (2007-2015). Written for the Valdai Discussion Club in October 2023, it offers a practitioner’s assessment of BRICS financial architecture.
Key Findings
The Two Existing Mechanisms
Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA) — Essentially dormant. Batista is blunt: the mechanism meant to serve as an alternative to IMF emergency lending has been “frozen” by central banks, with Brazil’s being “probably the worst.” No actual balance-of-payments operations have been conducted—only test runs. The surveillance unit envisioned was never established, and ironically, South Africa (the only member likely to need such support) has been among those making the CRA inflexible. The CRA underperforms even smaller funds like FLAR and the Arab Monetary Fund.
New Development Bank (NDB) — A disappointment despite its $10 billion paid-in capital. Batista cites weak leadership appointments (calling the Russian Vice President “remarkably unfit”), slow disbursements, poor governance, and—critically—continued dollar-denominated operations. The comparison with China’s AIIB (100+ members vs. NDB’s 8) is damning. He notes that internal problems were compounded by China-India tensions, Russian sanctions, and political crises in Brazil and South Africa.
The Currency Proposal
The most forward-looking section addresses the “R5” or “R5+” concept—a common BRICS reference currency. Batista’s roadmap:
Begin as a digital unit of account (basket-weighted by economic size)
Circulate alongside national currencies for international transactions
Create an Issuing Bank with predetermined rules
Back the currency with BRICS-guaranteed bonds (not gold or commodities, given price volatility)
Use the CRA and NDB as circulation mechanisms
Projecting Forward: The Post-SWIFT, Post-Dollar Financial Architecture
Taking Batista’s analysis as a baseline, here’s how the international financial system might evolve:
Near-Term (2024-2030): Parallel Infrastructure Building
The weaponization of SWIFT and dollar reserves against Russia crossed a Rubicon. Countries now understand that holding dollar reserves constitutes geopolitical vulnerability. We can expect:
Bilateral currency arrangements proliferating — China-Russia ruble-yuan settlements, India-UAE dirham-rupee oil trades, Saudi Arabia pricing oil in multiple currencies. These bypass both SWIFT and dollar denomination.
mBridge and CIPS expansion — China’s Cross-Border Interbank Payment System and the BIS-sponsored mBridge project (connecting central bank digital currencies) offer technical alternatives to SWIFT. The infrastructure is being built even as political consensus lags.
Fractured reserve holdings — Central banks will diversify into gold, yuan, and eventually other BRICS currencies—not as a replacement for dollars but as hedged insurance against asset freezes.
Medium-Term (2030-2040): Competing Monetary Blocs
If BRICS can overcome the dysfunction Batista documents, we might see:
A functioning R5+ unit of account — Initially for NDB lending and CRA operations, then gradually for trade invoicing among members. This doesn’t require the currency to be widely circulated; it only needs to be a credible settlement mechanism.
Commodity-linked pricing systems — Oil, metals, and agricultural commodities increasingly priced in baskets or non-dollar units. This doesn’t require OPEC to formally abandon petrodollars; it only requires enough transactions to occur outside dollar systems to create alternative price discovery.
IMF marginalization for certain borrowers — Countries with access to CRA, AIIB, or bilateral swap lines with China may increasingly bypass IMF conditionality. This was already visible with Argentina’s yuan swap arrangements.
Long-Term (2040+): Multipolarity or Fragmentation?
Two scenarios emerge:
Scenario A: Managed Multipolarity A reformed international system where multiple currencies serve reserve functions, settlements occur through interoperable CBDC bridges, and no single power can weaponize payments infrastructure. The dollar remains significant but not hegemonic—similar to sterling’s gradual decline post-1945. The IMF either reforms (unlikely without US consent to governance changes) or becomes one of several regional lending mechanisms.
Scenario B: Financial Fragmentation Competing blocs with limited interoperability. A dollar/euro zone (North America, Europe, allied Asia-Pacific), a yuan zone (China, much of Africa, Central Asia), and contested spaces (Southeast Asia, Latin America, Middle East). Transaction costs rise, global capital flows become more friction-heavy, and the efficiency gains from dollar hegemony are partially lost.
Critical Variables
Batista’s document highlights several factors that will determine which path prevails:
Political will within BRICS — Can India and China overcome their tensions? Will central banks (especially Brazil’s) stop sabotaging their own initiatives?
Chinese patience and ambition — Beijing has shown willingness to build slow, long-term infrastructure (AIIB, Belt and Road). Will it press for accelerated yuan internationalization or accept a multilateral R5+ approach?
US overreach — Each additional sanctions regime strengthens the case for alternatives. Iran, Russia, and Venezuela have already been pushed out of dollar systems; secondary sanctions on China would accelerate the timeline dramatically.
Technical execution — Digital currencies, blockchain settlement layers, and payment interoperability are genuinely complex. The engineering matters as much as the politics.
Conclusion
Batista’s paper is ultimately a document of frustrated potential. The BRICS have the economic mass and political motivation to challenge Western financial hegemony, but have been undermined by their own bureaucratic dysfunction, personnel failures, and internal tensions. The CRA and NDB were conceived as the financial spine of a multipolar world; they’ve functioned more like appendices.
Yet the strategic logic remains compelling. The freezing of Russian reserves demonstrated that dollar-denominated wealth exists at the pleasure of Washington. For countries outside the Western alliance structure, this is intolerable. The question is not whether alternatives will emerge, but when and how functional they’ll be.
The work on BRICS Pay bridge architecture and regenerative economic systems sits precisely at this transition point—building the technical and conceptual infrastructure for a post-hegemonic financial order before the political consensus fully crystallizes.
Last updated