https://sputniknews.in/20250730/two-global-financial-systems-yes-it-comes-to-that--9519745.html
Two Global Financial Systems? Yes, It Comes to That
Two Global Financial Systems? Yes, It Comes to That
Sputnik India
A most interesting idea about the future of money has been stated by a venerable Russian banker, Mr. Sergei Storchak, currently with the Vnesheconombank. In... 30.07.2025, Sputnik India
2025-07-30T20:45+0530
2025-07-30T20:45+0530
2025-07-30T20:45+0530
sputnik opinion
global south
brazil
russia
unesco
world bank
international monetary fund (imf)
https://cdn1.img.sputniknews.in/img/07e7/05/12/2022438_0:0:1200:675_1920x0_80_0_0_11031177f3e47530cb0df5292ec6220b.jpg
We are talking about Mr. Storchak’s interview to The Expert magazine, where the conversation was mostly about the 10thanniversary of the New Development Bank, launched by five founding members of the Brics nations, that is Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, with the headquarters in Shanghai and currently chaired by Ms. Dilma Roussef, ex-President of Brazil.A lot of things have been said about that bank, chiefly about its being a powerful alternative to the West-dominated global financial system, embodied mostly in the International Monetary Fund and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, based in the US. What’s valuable about Mr. Storchak’s opinion, is that he never resorts to political sloganeering, being a hardline realist. And, to note, Storchak is among the founding fathers of the NDB, it was he who headed the Russian delegation 10 years ago, when the bank had been launched in Moscow.First, he says that there are currently 30 development banks in the world, with only 10 acting globally. Serious people have never dreamed about a new banking structure grabbing, in only 10 years, the top slot among such financial institutions. But the progress is considerable. Enough is to say that NDB participates actively in the work of G20, the gathering of the world’s top economies. And it has grown recently, with new stockholders coming in.But it looks like there will be no G20 very soon, with its chairmanship now passing to the US. The US has left the World Health Organization, UNESCO and other such structures, so G20 has to get ready for shocks.All the more relevant is Storchak’s prediction of a gradual creation of two separate global financial systems, one for the West, the other for the rest. At least, that’s where the world is moving right now. NDB may be only a part of that new alternative structure, and it will take some time for that structure to grow roots.The thing is, the existing Western structure often has no money to cover all the needs of the world. It has not even got the money for financing the campaigns that the West itself tried to impose on the Global South. Last year’s climate conference COP29 in Azerbaijan has heard the promise of the West to allocate 300 billion dollars annually on the so-called climate goals, while it defaulted on its own promise of 100 billion annually in ten previous years.Besides, there is a serious ongoing discussion on the subject of what is development, and, hence, what is the difference between an ordinary commercial bank, and a development bank. At least, only last year the World Bank has finally adopted a list of development goals making nations eligible for crediting. A goal may be a certain number of workplaces created, or electric power lines laid, something concrete and material.In any case national development banks are doing their job much better than the global structures, created in the middle of the last century. And, currently, these banks are already investing twice as much as the old, Western financial structures.Finally, you have to move fast enough when changes are due. But, says Storchak, the old financial system is not even trying to renovate. Bankers of the world are actively debating that stagnation, there were at least three panel discussions on the matter at the St. Petersburg Economic Forum. To remind, when the current structure of the global finance has been laid down in 1944, all the participants had very clear plans of what had to be done.No clear commonly accepted ideas are present today, so the idea of the gradual creation of an alternative system seems to be the only way out. What happens now is a kind of field tests for such system, and the NDB activities are just one example.These field tests look cumbersome, sometimes. One of the key questions here sounds like “what is money, and what will be money tomorrow”. Theoretically one common international currency is a good idea. While in reality one cannot use it freely, being afraid of political risks of adopting dollar or euro as the single means of investment or payment. So, currently, the NDB and many others experiment with payments and other operations in national currencies, being fully aware of the difficulties of that method. It’s expensive and complicated, but still needed.What we have here is a situation, very typical of all the human development. It’s always about people with technical minds pitting themselves against human nature. The economists will tell you that huge global production is logical, economical and, hence, inevitable. People with more poetical nature will always admire everything hand-made and human, even though more expensive. One global financial system looks terribly efficient. While I’d prefer to deal personally with my banker, not with a global online network.Thing is, people hate unification and domination. People like choice in everything. Same with nations and groups of nations.Why, only yesterday I have read a commentary on the Vzglyad website, written by a professor of the Moscow Financial Institute (finance people again) and explaining why the idea of a “collective West” has been doomed from the start. The thing is, says Professor Lebedev, the more powerful is that common doctrine, that common set of values that was supposed to cement the West, the more chances are that it will crack and split the West itself.Quoting the American researchers, Lebedev recalls the failure of a very logical idea of a united Arab world in 1950-s – 1970-s. There even was something called the United Arab Republic at the time, but it failed. The problem was, Gamal Abdel Nasser, the Egyptian leader who tried to unite the Arabs, was too good, too clever and too powerful for his neighbors’ taste. While his successor, Anwar Sadat, was anything but powerful, so he often succeeded on secondary issues, where Nasser failed.To note, all the concepts of the Global South today, be it Brics or purely regional groupings, are stressing the absence of obligatory common ideologies, and that’s exactly what unites that Global South. If there are any ideas circulating among the Global Majority of nations, these are concepts of a beautiful variety of customs, traditional and other values, plus the concept of mutual respect andadmiration towards that diversity.So, there has to be diversity in cultures, values and political systems. How about finance? Can there be two or more financial systems for that world of ours, or is that technically impossible? People with mathematical minds will want to say that money (and technical standards, and technologies) will just have to be one for all. People who know something about human nature will not accept that verdict.Dmitry Kosyrev is a Russian writer, author of spy novels and short stories. He also did columns for the Pioneer and Firstpost.comThe compact versionA most interesting idea about the future of money has been stated by a venerable Russian banker, Mr. Sergei Storchak, currently with the Vnesheconombank. We are talking about Mr. Storchak’s interview to The Expert magazine, where the conversation was mostly about the 10th anniversary of the New Development Bank, launched by five founding members of the Brics nations, that is Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, with the headquarters in Shanghai and currently chaired by Ms. Dilma Roussef, ex-President of Brazil.To note, Storchak is among the founding fathers of the NDB, it was he who headed the Russian delegation 10 years ago, when the bank had been launched in Moscow. All the more relevant is Storchak’s prediction of a gradual creation of two separate global financial systems, one for the West, the other for the rest.The thing is, the existing Western structure often has no money to cover all the needs of the world. In any case national development banks are doing their job much better than the global structures, created in the middle of the last century. And, currently, these banks are already investing twice as much as the old, Western financial structures.Finally, you have to move fast enough when changes are due. But, says Storchak, the old financial system is not even trying to renovate. So the idea of the gradual creation of an alternative system seems to be the only way out. What happens now is a kind of field tests for such system, and the NDB activities are just one example.One of the key questions here sounds like “what is money, and what will be money tomorrow”. Theoretically one common international currency is a good idea. While in reality one cannot use it freely, being afraid of political risks of adopting dollar or euro as the single means of investment or payment. So, currently, the NDB and many others experiment with payments and other operations in national currencies, being fully aware of the difficulties of that method. It’s expensive and complicated, but still needed.What we have here is a situation, very typical of all the human development. It’s always about people with technical minds pitting themselves against human nature. The economists will tell you that huge global production is logical, economical and, hence, inevitable. People with more poetical nature will always admire everything hand-made and human, even though more expensive. One global financial system looks terribly efficient. While I’d prefer to deal personally with my banker, not with a global online network.Thing is, people hate unification and domination. People like choice in everything. Same with nations and groups of nations. To note, all the concepts of the Global South today, be it Brics or purely regional groupings, are stressing the absence of obligatory common ideologies, and that’s exactly what unites that Global South.So, there has to be diversity in cultures, values and political systems. How about finance? People with mathematical minds will want to say that money (and technical standards, and technologies) will just have to be one for all. People who know something about human nature will not accept that verdict.Dmitry Kosyrev is a Russian writer, author of spy novels and short stories. He also did columns for the Pioneer and Firstpost.com
https://sputniknews.in/20250716/being-the-strongest-sudden-praise-of-russian-army-by-french-general--9459316.html
global south
brazil
russia
Sputnik India
feedback.hindi@sputniknews.com
+74956456601
MIA „Rossiya Segodnya“
2025
News
en_IN
Sputnik India
feedback.hindi@sputniknews.com
+74956456601
MIA „Rossiya Segodnya“
Sputnik India
feedback.hindi@sputniknews.com
+74956456601
MIA „Rossiya Segodnya“
global south, brazil, russia, unesco, world bank, international monetary fund (imf)
global south, brazil, russia, unesco, world bank, international monetary fund (imf)
We are talking about Mr. Storchak’s interview to The Expert magazine, where the conversation was mostly about the 10thanniversary of the New Development Bank, launched by five founding members of the Brics nations, that is Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, with the headquarters in Shanghai and currently chaired by Ms. Dilma Roussef, ex-President of Brazil.
A lot of things have been said about that bank, chiefly about its being a powerful alternative to the West-dominated global financial system, embodied mostly in the International Monetary Fund and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, based in the US. What’s valuable about Mr. Storchak’s opinion, is that he never resorts to political sloganeering, being a hardline realist. And, to note, Storchak is among the founding fathers of the NDB, it was he who headed the Russian delegation 10 years ago, when the bank had been launched in Moscow.
First, he says that there are currently 30 development banks in the world, with only 10 acting globally. Serious people have never dreamed about a new banking structure grabbing, in only 10 years, the top slot among such financial institutions. But the progress is considerable. Enough is to say that NDB participates actively in the work of G20, the gathering of the world’s top economies. And it has grown recently, with new stockholders coming in.
But it looks like there will be no G20 very soon, with its chairmanship now passing to the US. The US has left the World Health Organization, UNESCO and other such structures, so G20 has to get ready for shocks.
All the more relevant is Storchak’s prediction of a gradual creation of two separate global financial systems, one for the West, the other for the rest. At least, that’s where the world is moving right now. NDB may be only a part of that new alternative structure, and it will take some time for that structure to grow roots.
The thing is, the existing Western structure often has no money to cover all the needs of the world. It has not even got the money for financing the campaigns that the West itself tried to impose on the Global South. Last year’s climate conference COP29 in Azerbaijan has heard the promise of the West to allocate 300 billion dollars annually on the so-called climate goals, while it defaulted on its own promise of 100 billion annually in ten previous years.
Besides, there is a serious ongoing discussion on the subject of what is development, and, hence, what is the difference between an ordinary commercial bank, and a development bank. At least, only last year the World Bank has finally adopted a list of development goals making nations eligible for crediting. A goal may be a certain number of workplaces created, or electric power lines laid, something concrete and material.
In any case national development banks are doing their job much better than the global structures, created in the middle of the last century. And, currently, these banks are already investing twice as much as the old, Western financial structures.
Finally, you have to move fast enough when changes are due. But, says Storchak, the old financial system is not even trying to renovate. Bankers of the world are actively debating that stagnation, there were at least three panel discussions on the matter at the St. Petersburg Economic Forum. To remind, when the current structure of the global finance has been laid down in 1944, all the participants had very clear plans of what had to be done.
No clear commonly accepted ideas are present today, so the idea of the gradual creation of an alternative system seems to be the only way out. What happens now is a kind of field tests for such system, and the NDB activities are just one example.
These field tests look cumbersome, sometimes. One of the key questions here sounds like “what is money, and what will be money tomorrow”. Theoretically one common international currency is a good idea. While in reality one cannot use it freely, being afraid of political risks of adopting dollar or euro as the single means of investment or payment. So, currently, the NDB and many others experiment with payments and other operations in national currencies, being fully aware of the difficulties of that method. It’s expensive and complicated, but still needed.
What we have here is a situation, very typical of all the human development. It’s always about people with technical minds pitting themselves against human nature. The economists will tell you that huge global production is logical, economical and, hence, inevitable. People with more poetical nature will always admire everything hand-made and human, even though more expensive. One global financial system looks terribly efficient. While I’d prefer to deal personally with my banker, not with a global online network.
Thing is, people hate unification and domination. People like choice in everything. Same with nations and groups of nations.
Why, only yesterday I have read a commentary on the Vzglyad website, written by a professor of the Moscow Financial Institute (finance people again) and explaining why the idea of a “collective West” has been doomed from the start. The thing is, says Professor Lebedev, the more powerful is that common doctrine, that common set of values that was supposed to cement the West, the more chances are that it will crack and split the West itself.
Quoting the American researchers, Lebedev recalls the failure of a very logical idea of a united Arab world in 1950-s – 1970-s. There even was something called the United Arab Republic at the time, but it failed. The problem was, Gamal Abdel Nasser, the Egyptian leader who tried to unite the Arabs, was too good, too clever and too powerful for his neighbors’ taste. While his successor, Anwar Sadat, was anything but powerful, so he often succeeded on secondary issues, where Nasser failed.
To note, all the concepts of the Global South today, be it Brics or purely regional groupings, are stressing the absence of obligatory common ideologies, and that’s exactly what unites that Global South. If there are any ideas circulating among the Global Majority of nations, these are concepts of a beautiful variety of customs, traditional and other values, plus the concept of mutual respect and
admiration towards that diversity.
So, there has to be diversity in cultures, values and political systems. How about finance? Can there be two or more financial systems for that world of ours, or is that technically impossible? People with mathematical minds will want to say that money (and technical standards, and technologies) will just have to be one for all. People who know something about human nature will not accept that verdict.
Dmitry Kosyrev is a Russian writer, author of spy novels and short stories. He also did columns for the Pioneer and Firstpost.com
A most interesting idea about the future of money has been stated by a venerable Russian banker, Mr. Sergei Storchak, currently with the Vnesheconombank. We are talking about Mr. Storchak’s interview to The Expert magazine, where the conversation was mostly about the 10th anniversary of the New Development Bank, launched by five founding members of the Brics nations, that is Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, with the headquarters in Shanghai and currently chaired by Ms. Dilma Roussef, ex-President of Brazil.
To note, Storchak is among the founding fathers of the NDB, it was he who headed the Russian delegation 10 years ago, when the bank had been launched in Moscow. All the more relevant is Storchak’s prediction of a gradual creation of two separate global financial systems, one for the West, the other for the rest.
The thing is, the existing Western structure often has no money to cover all the needs of the world. In any case national development banks are doing their job much better than the global structures, created in the middle of the last century. And, currently, these banks are already investing twice as much as the old, Western financial structures.
Finally, you have to move fast enough when changes are due. But, says Storchak, the old financial system is not even trying to renovate. So the idea of the gradual creation of an alternative system seems to be the only way out. What happens now is a kind of field tests for such system, and the NDB activities are just one example.
One of the key questions here sounds like “what is money, and what will be money tomorrow”. Theoretically one common international currency is a good idea. While in reality one cannot use it freely, being afraid of political risks of adopting dollar or euro as the single means of investment or payment. So, currently, the NDB and many others experiment with payments and other operations in national currencies, being fully aware of the difficulties of that method. It’s expensive and complicated, but still needed.
What we have here is a situation, very typical of all the human development. It’s always about people with technical minds pitting themselves against human nature. The economists will tell you that huge global production is logical, economical and, hence, inevitable. People with more poetical nature will always admire everything hand-made and human, even though more expensive. One global financial system looks terribly efficient. While I’d prefer to deal personally with my banker, not with a global online network.
Thing is, people hate unification and domination. People like choice in everything. Same with nations and groups of nations. To note, all the concepts of the Global South today, be it Brics or purely regional groupings, are stressing the absence of obligatory common ideologies, and that’s exactly what unites that Global South.
So, there has to be diversity in cultures, values and political systems. How about finance? People with mathematical minds will want to say that money (and technical standards, and technologies) will just have to be one for all. People who know something about human nature will not accept that verdict.
Dmitry Kosyrev is a Russian writer, author of spy novels and short stories. He also did columns for the Pioneer and Firstpost.com
