تدابیر ایران و جامعۀ بین‌المللی علیه تحریم با تأکید بر سیستم بین‌المللی پرداخت سوئیفت و دلارزدایی در پرتو اقتصاد مقاومتی

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار، گروه حقوق بین‌الملل، دانشکدۀ حقوق، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران

2 دانشجوی دکتری رشته حقوق، دانشکده‌ حقوق، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران

3 استادیار، گروه حقوق بین‌الملل، دانشکدۀ حقوق، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران

چکیده

دولت‌ها اغلب از تحریم­های اقتصادی برای تأثیر یا تضعیف اقدامات سیاسی خود و سایر کشورها استفاده می‌کنند. آمریکا به‌واسطۀ هژمونی دلار، به‌عنوان ارز بین­المللی و سیستم پرداخت‌های بین­المللی سوئیفت (جامعۀ جهانی ارتباطات مالی بین‌بانکی)، به‌دنبال اهداف استراژیک اقتصاد دفاعی و جنگ اقتصادی است. قطع ارتباط یک کشور از شبکۀ سوئیفت یکی از قدرتمند­ترین سلاح­های اقتصادی است. آمریکا سوئیفت را به ابزار جنگ اقتصادی علیه کشورهای هدف تبدیل کرده است. پرسش مقاله این است: جامعۀ بین­المللی دولت‌های متأثر از تحریم­های یک‌جانبۀ آمریکا به‌ویژه ایران چه تدابیری برای مقابله با این­گونه اقدامات یک­جانبه اتخاذ کرده­اند؟ در پاسخ به این سؤال به روش توصیفی و تحلیلی، عملکرد بین­المللی دولت‌های متأثر از تحریم و مطالعۀ ارزها و ابزارهای پرداخت جایگزین، این نتیجه حاصل شد که سوء‌استفادۀ آمریکا از ابزارهای بین­المللی مالی و تسلیحاتی کردن آن‌ها باعث اجرای سیاست­های دلارزدایی و ابتکارات و بسترهای پرداخت جایگزین و منطقه­ای شدن نظام پولی بین­المللی شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Measures of the International Community and Iran Against Sanctions by Emphasizing the SWIFT’s International Payment System and De-Dollarization Considering the Resistance Economy

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hossein Ale kajbaf 1
  • Hassan karimi Mahabadi 2
  • Mojtaba Babaee 3
1 Associate Professor, Department of International Law, Faculty of Law, Payam Noor University, Tehran, Iran
2 PhD student in Law, Faculty of Law, Payam Noor University, Tehran, Iran
3 Assistant Professor, Department of International Law, Faculty of Law, Payam Noor University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

  Governments commonly use economic sanctions to influence or weaken other countries’ policies. The United States employs the hegemony of dollar, as an international currency, and the international payment system, SWIFT, to follow its strategic aims of defensive economy and economic war. One of the most powerful economic tools is to cut a country’s access to SWIFT. America has turned SWIFT as an economic tool against other countries. Accordingly, this study seeks to find out what measures have been taken by the international governments, in particular Iran, to combat against the unilateral sanctions enforced by America. To answer the question, a descriptive-analytical method was used to investigate the performance of the international governments affected by sanctions, cryptocurrency, and alternative payment systems. The findings showed that America’s misuse of the financial international tools has resulted in de-dollarization, and creativity in employing alternative payment systems, which by its own account has resulted in regional monetary systems.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Alternative methods of dollar payment
  • SWIFT
  • dollar hegemony
  • de-dollarization
  • cryptocurrency
Amato, M., & Fantacci, L. (2012).  The end of finance. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. p. 96.
Amato, M., & Fantacci, L. (2020). A fistful of bitcoin. Risks and opportunities of virtual currencies. Milano: Bocconi University Press. pp. 38-42.
Anchustegui, I. H., & Hunter, T. S. (2019).  Oil as currency: Venezuela’s Petro, a new “Oil Pattern”? OGEL. Received from: https://www.ogel.org/journal-advance-publication-article.asp? Key=588.
Armijo, L. E., & Katada, S. N. (2015). Theorizing the financial statecraft of emerging powers. New Political Economy, 20(1), 42-62.
Barontini, C., & Holden, H. (2019). Proceeding with caution – A survey on central bank digital currency. BIS Papers, n. 101.
Bräutigam, D., & Gallagher, K. (2014). Bartering globalization: China’s commodity-backed finance in Africa and Latin America. Global Policy, 5(3), 346-352.
Bullmann, D., Klemm, J., & Pinna, A. (2019). In search for stability in crypto-assets: Are stablecoins the solution?. ECB Occasional Paper Series, n. 230.
Carney, M. (2019). The growing challenges for monetary policy in the current international monetary and financial system. p. 15. Speech given by the Governor of the Bank of England at the Jackson Hole Symposium 2019. Received from: https://www.bis.org/review/r190827b.htm
China’s central bank digital currency: Implications for ASEAN, Dipinder Singh Randhawa, 30 December 2020. Received from: https://www.rsis.edu.sg/rsis-publication/rsis
Christie, E. H. (2016). The design and impact of Western economic sanctions against Russia. The RUSI Journal, 161(3), 52-64.
Cook, S., & Soramäki, K. (2014). The global network of payment flows. SWIFT Institute Working Paper, n. 06.
Daneshjafari, D. (2012). A lecture on resistance economy in Allameh Tabatabai University. (Persain)
Drezner, D. W. (2015). Targeted Sanctions in a World of Global Finance. International Interactions, 41(4), 755-764. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050629.2015.104129
Eichengreen, B. (1987). Hegemonic stability theories of the internatioanl monetary system. NBER Working Paper, n. 2193.
Fantacci, L. (2019). Cryptocurrencies and the Denationalization of Money. International Journal of Political Economy, 48(2), 105-126.
Fantacci, L., & Gobbi, L. (2018). Mobile capital as the ultimate form of war finance. In J. Pixley, & H. Flam (Eds.), Critical junctures in mobile capital (pp. 93-112). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  Farrel, H., & Newman, A. L. (2019). Weaponized interdependence: How global economic networks shape state coercion. International Security, 44(1), 42-79.
Giuminelli, F. (2018). The redistributive impact of restrictive measures on EU members: Winners and losers from imposing sanctions on Russia. Journal of Common Market Studies, 55(5), 1062-1080.
Gramsci, A. (1996). Antonio Gramsci Prison notebooks. Vol. II. New York: Columbia University Press; orig. It. version Quaderni del carcere, Torino: Einaudi, 1948-1951.
Helleiner, E. (2008). Political determinants of international currencies: What future for the US Dollar? Review of International Political Economy, 15(3), 354-378. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290801928731
Humphrey, C., & Michaelowa, K. (2018). China in Africa: Competition for traditional development finance institutions?. World Development, 120(61), 15-28.
Johnson, J. (2008). Forbidden fruit: Russia’s uneasy relationship with the US Dollar. Review of International Political Economy, 15(3), 379-398. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290801928749
Kirkpatrick, K., Savage, C., Johnston, R., & Hanson, M. (2019). Virtual currency in sanctioned jurisdictions: Stepping outside of SWIFT. The Journal of Investment Compliance, 20(2), 39-44.
Kirshner, J. (2008). Dollar primacy and American power: What’s at stake?. Review of International Political Economy, 15(3), 418-438. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290801928798
Lew, J. (2016). Remarks of Secretary Lew on the Evolution of Sanctions and Lessons for the Future at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. U.S. Treasury.
Lichtblau, E., & Risen, J. (2006). Bank data are sifted by US in secret to block terror. The New York Times. Received from: https://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/23/washington/23intel.html
Mehrjoo, M. (2014). Entrepreneurship culture and employment. (Persain)
Mundell, R. A. (1961). A theory of optimum currency areas. The American Economic Review, 51(4), 657-665.
Posen, A. S. (2008). Why the Euro will not rival the Dollar. International Finance, 11(1), 75-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2362.2008.00217.x
Prasad, E. S. (2017). Gaining currency: The rise of the renminbi. New York: Oxford University Press.
Supreme leader’s lecture for students. 2012. (Persain)
Tasnim news agency. Economic news of the world. 2021. (Persain)
Wriston, W. (1988). Technology and sovereignty, Foreign Affairs, 67, 63-75.
Zimmermann, H. (2002). Money and security: Troops, monetary policy, and West Germany’s relations with the United States and Britain. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1950-1971.