BIS distances from Project mBridge amid BRICS sanctions concerns

by

As a seasoned financial analyst with over two decades of experience navigating the complexities of global finance and geopolitics, I find myself intrigued by the recent developments surrounding Project mBridge and its potential implications for the international financial system.

The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) has ceased to be involved in Project mBridge, a collaboration they initiated on wholesale central bank digital currencies (CBDC) with their Innovation Hub since 2021. However, it’s important to note that the project is still far from being operational, as stated by BIS general manager Augustin Carstens on October 31.

The mBridge project, built on tech from the Hyperledger Foundation, achieved Minimum Viable Product (MVP) status in June and welcomed contributions from the private sector. Financial institutions in China and the UAE have responded to this invitation by expressing interest to participate.

In addition to the Bank for International Settlements, the initial participants of this venture are the main financial institutions of China, Hong Kong, Thailand, and the United Arab Emirates. Saudi Arabia officially became a complete member in June, and the project currently boasts more than 25 countries observing its progress.

BIS insists it backs sanctions

It was apparent why Carstens sought to separate his organization from the intriguing project and minimize its impact during the fireside chat at the Santander International Banking Conference, as he himself acknowledged when asked about it.

“I have noted media speculation recently that one of your projects — Project mBridge — could provide the basis for a BRICS initiative to circumvent sanctions. Is that plausible?” 

As a researcher, I’d like to clarify that when it comes to political dimensions, it’s important to note that mBridge is not analogous to the ‘BRICS Bridge.’ To set the record straight, this is an unequivocal statement.

Actually, mBridge was created to cater to the requirements of central banks. However, Carstens didn’t rule out the possibility that Project mBridge could be used to bypass sanctions. In other words, he did not explicitly state it as an unlikely scenario.

“The BIS does not operate with any countries, nor can its products be used by any countries that are subject to sanctions […] And all central bank members are in this mindset.”

As a researcher delving into global economic alliances, I’ve observed that the BRICS organization, comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, has been engaged in conversations regarding de-dollarization for quite some time now. Notably, Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE have since joined our ranks, which means that over 40% of both BRICS and Project mBridge’s membership overlaps.

The BRICS grouping has consistently advocated for shifting away from the U.S. dollar in global financial transactions. However, their attempts to achieve this aim have yielded limited results thus far. Yet, the emphasis on exploring non-dollar currency alternatives, as evident at the BRICS summit held in Kazan, Russia in October, has left many international spectators uneasy.

Reconsidering international transfers

The appeal of Project mBridge for potential sanctions evaders is its circumvention of the correspondent banking system, which is the practical mechanism for imposing sanctions.

Carstens was keen on drawing focus towards another BIS project, namely Project Agora, which he introduced as the foundation for his “Finternet” idea of global financial structure in April.

The Eurosystem (representing the Euro), the Bank of Japan, the Bank of Korea, the Bank of Mexico, the Swiss National Bank, the Bank of England, and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York are involved in a collaborative initiative called Project Agora – none of the BRICS nations take part. Notably, this project upholds the infrastructure for correspondent banking.

Read More

2024-10-31 20:40