Gastritis and Greek Yogurt: Is It Safe? A Complete Diet Guide for Gastritis

on

Financial Nuclear Weapon : SWIFT

on

 

swift

Today, when discussing the international financial system, the name “SWIFT” invariably comes up. Often known as a cross-border remittance or an interbank settlement network, SWIFT has recently been labeled a “financial nuclear weapon” due to the way it can be used as a means of sanctioning specific countries or financial institutions. Indeed, when major Western countries like the U.S. and those in Europe brandish a SWIFT ban as part of their sanctions, the target nation’s financial activities are effectively crippled. It is from this enormous impact that the nickname “financial nuclear weapon” emerges.

In this post, we will examine what SWIFT actually is, how it works, why it came to be called a “financial nuclear weapon” and what role it has been playing in recent global affairs.

1. What Is SWIFT?

(1) Definition of SWIFT

  • SWIFT stands for “Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication,” a global interbank financial telecommunication network that enables secure messaging between financial institutions around the world.
  • Founded in 1973 in Belgium, it is operated as a cooperative. Its shareholders are major financial institutions worldwide, and it is no exaggeration to say that nearly all banks globally use the SWIFT network.

(2) Role

  • SWIFT itself does not transfer or hold money (funds). Rather, it provides a communications network for standardized, secure transmission of financial messages (for example, “Bank A instruct Bank B to credit a certain amount”).
  • By using SWIFT codes to consistently identify banks, cross-border remittances can be processed rapidly and accurately.

(3) Security and Trust

  • SWIFT employs encrypted messaging and security measures designed to prevent hacking or tampering, thereby enhancing trust in financial institution communications.
  • A wide range of financial transactions, including international remittances, trade settlements, and foreign exchange, are processed via SWIFT.

2. The Reason It’s Called a “Financial Nuclear Weapon”

(1) Means of International Sanctions

Why is SWIFT referred to as a “financial nuclear weapon”? Because excluding a specific country from the SWIFT network essentially makes that country’s international financial transactions nearly impossible.

  1. Example: Iran, Russia Sanctions

    • Iran was cut off from SWIFT in the past due to sanctions related to its nuclear development. Consequently, Iranian banks were almost entirely unable to make or receive foreign remittances or dollar settlements, causing severe economic damage.
    • When Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, the U.S. and EU announced that they would exclude certain Russian banks from SWIFT. As a result, those Russian financial institutions became isolated from global payment networks, leading to a collapse in the ruble’s value and significant difficulties with trade settlement.

  2. Centrality of the U.S. Dollar

    • The power of SWIFT-based sanctions is deeply tied to U.S. dollar dominance. Since the bulk of global trade and financial transactions is conducted in dollars, losing access to SWIFT effectively kicks a country out of the international financial system.

(2) Economic Paralysis Effect

Being cut off from SWIFT means, simply put, impossibility (or extreme difficulty) in conducting foreign bank transfers or remittances. Thus:

  • Export-import transactions become difficult, and obtaining foreign capital is blocked.
  • Managing foreign exchange reserves, selling overseas assets, and conducting dollar-based transactions are all drastically limited.
  • The economy, essentially isolated, risks supply disruptions and currency value collapse.

Hence the metaphorical use of “nuclear weapon,” reflecting the severe impact of a SWIFT ban.

3. The History and Structure of SWIFT

(1) Founding Period (1970s)

Before the 1970s, international remittances were handled by systems like Telex, but the lack of standardized messaging and security caused frequent errors and the risk of fraud. To address these issues, in 1973, 239 banks across 15 countries came together to form SWIFT.

(2) Global Expansion (1980s–1990s)

As financial markets became more globalized in the 1980s–1990s, the number of banks joining the SWIFT network soared. With the development of mainframe computers and telecommunications, message transmission became faster, and many central banks worldwide participated to support international payment standardization.

(3) Post (2000s)

With the advances in the internet and digital technology—and emphasis on tracing terrorist financing—SWIFT solidified its role as a global financial security infrastructure. One famous example is the “TFTP (Terrorist Finance Tracking Program)” after 9/11, where the U.S. Treasury utilized SWIFT data to track terrorist financial flows.

4. The U.S., EU, and Real-World Examples of SWIFT Sanctions

(1) Iran Sanctions

Due to Iran’s nuclear development issue, in around 2012, the European Union demanded that SWIFT cut off Iranian banks, which SWIFT complied with, effectively blocking Iran from global settlements. As a result, Iran faced extreme difficulties in collecting export proceeds (like oil revenues) and suffered significant setbacks in global trade.

(2) Russia Case

Following Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the U.S. and EU decided to remove certain major Russian banks from SWIFT. This made foreign remittances and settlements either cumbersome or impossible for those banks, isolating Russia’s economy. Russia tried alternative systems like SPFS (its domestic payment system) and partly used China’s CIPS to mitigate the blow.

(3) Other Countries

Countries like North Korea or Syria also face limited SWIFT access due to financial sanctions. Thus, SWIFT sanctions are recognized as a potent weapon used by the international community to pressure nations that behave unlawfully.

5. How SWIFT Works and Its Characteristics

(1) Message Standards

SWIFT is known for its MT (Messaging Types) format, adopting a wide variety of message protocols for bank transfers, letters of credit, securities deals, foreign exchange, derivatives, and more. This standardization means that any bank worldwide can handle transaction instructions using the same protocol.

(2) Membership Fees and Charges

SWIFT is funded by membership fees and message fees paid by its member banks. Since large banks often send thousands or tens of thousands of transaction messages, SWIFT enjoys a stable revenue base.

(3) Security and Trust

SWIFT’s decades of operational stability have won it the reputation of being “one of the safest messaging networks in finance.” Although hacking incidents are rare, the 2016 Bangladesh Central Bank case—where SWIFT credentials were compromised for fraudulent transfers—highlights the importance of each member’s own security measures.

6. Why It’s Called a “Nuclear Weapon”: Financial and Political Ramifications

(1) The Absolute Nature of Financial Infrastructure

A huge portion of global trade and payments depends on currencies like the dollar and euro, with SWIFT at the core. If a country is severed from SWIFT, it finds itself in an economic “vacuum.” This destructive capacity is likened to nuclear weapons, hence the moniker “financial nuclear weapon.”

(2) Issues in International Law and Politics

Even though SWIFT is structured as a private-sector cooperative, it can be subject to political pressure from the U.S., Europe, and other Western powers. Some argue that excluding a country from SWIFT lacks a solid basis in international law, and that it can lead to significant harm for civilians in the targeted country.

7. Alternatives to SWIFT: CIPS, SPFS, and Digital Currencies

(1) China’s CIPS

Aiming to reduce reliance on the U.S. dollar and promote the yuan’s international role, China operates its own system, CIPS (Cross-Border Interbank Payment System). It may work alongside SWIFT, but it is not as globally entrenched as SWIFT in terms of scale or coverage.

(2) Russia’s SPFS

The Central Bank of Russia developed SPFS (System for Transfer of Financial Messages) to counter potential SWIFT sanctions, but it has limited international reach. It mainly applies to domestic and some neighboring countries.

(3) CBDCs and Blockchain-Based Alternatives

In the future, Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) or blockchain-based networks—like stablecoins—could emerge as alternatives to SWIFT. Still, at present, none match SWIFT in global ubiquity and reliability.

8. Observations: Limitations and the Future of SWIFT Sanctions

(1) The Russia Case and Resistance

Partial SWIFT bans on Russian banks showed that if the rest of the world does not fully participate, the complete isolation effect may be tempered. Russia has sought ways to circumvent it by trading in non-dollar currencies or using alternative payment systems.

(2) Digital Transition and Competition

With the rise of blockchain and digital currencies, SWIFT’s near-monopoly could erode over time. A variety of cross-border payment platforms offering near-instant settlement are emerging, including Ripple (XRP). However, SWIFT’s extensive network effect and reliability remain challenging to replace in the near term.

(3) From “Nuclear Weapon” to “Negotiation Card”

Countries that anticipate possible exclusion from SWIFT may prepare alternative systems or digital currencies to sidestep sanctions. SWIFT sanctions have become a major bargaining chip in international diplomacy, and how they are applied can shake up alliances and relationships between states.

Conclusion: SWIFT’s Role in the Modern Financial Landscape

Referring to “Financial Nuclear Weapon SWIFT” is not mere hyperbole; it reflects the enormous influence SWIFT wields in modern international finance. Exclusion from SWIFT means virtual isolation for a country’s economy. Accordingly, when the U.S. or EU imposes sanctions, denying SWIFT access is often at the heart of their approach.

Still, one must remember that SWIFT is a private-sector cooperative and that the emergence of digital and blockchain-based payment channels might eventually present alternatives. For now, though, SWIFT remains the nerve center of global finance, capable of wreaking “nuclear-level” damage when used as a sanctions tool.

Understanding SWIFT is essential for grasping the flow of modern finance, international sanctions and diplomacy, and the dollar-centric order. As the digital age evolves, it will be interesting to see how SWIFT’s role changes and how powerful its potential impact remains.