Skip to content
Home » SWIFT and Sanctions: How Banking System Impacts International Relations

SWIFT and Sanctions: How Banking System Impacts International Relations

    SWIFT and Sanctions How Banking System Impacts International Relations

    An organization called SWIFT, also known as the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, offers resources to support safe and effective communication between financial institutions all over the world. Although SWIFT doesn’t handle transactions or retain assets, the billions of communications it sends and receives across institutions enable the secure and timely processing of a wide range of banking operations.

    SWIFT has expanded throughout the course of its nearly 50-year history to include 11,000 institutions across more than 200 nations and territories. It plays a significant role in the world financial system.

    Due to SWIFT’s significance in the worldwide financial sector, member organizations and nations have tremendous incentives to maintain good standing with the system lest they lose access to the most important global platform for transaction facilitation. The prospect of sanctions and exclusion from SWIFT can therefore be a potent tool in international relations.

    SWIFT’s Organizational Structure and Sanctions

    SWIFT is a cooperative, impartial organization that serves the interests of all of its members. As a result, it doesn’t take a specific stance on global geopolitics. Nevertheless, the organization is under the control of the central banks of the G10 countries and is governed by Belgian law, which is a part of the EU.

    SWIFT cannot unilaterally decide which jurisdiction’s sanctions to obey because sanctions can be imposed against countries or people by many different jurisdictions around the world. The governance structure of SWIFT does, however, require that it adhere to EU rules; if the EU imposes sanctions, SWIFT is required to abide by those rules.

    How SWIFT Sanctions Work

    The EU imposed restrictions in 2012 that forbade SWIFT from offering financial communications services to specific Iranian institutions. In early 2016, the EU delisted many of these banks, after which they rejoined to SWIFT.

    In this illustration, banks that were kicked off of SWIFT would be compelled to adopt a different, far less well-known alternate method of communicating with other financial institutions throughout the world. The SWIFT sanctions on Iran greatly hampered international trade since potential buyers trying to acquire Iranian items from outside the nation found it extremely challenging to arrange payments.

    This scenario demonstrates the effectiveness of SWIFT sanctions as a geopolitical inducement or deterrent. Due to their inability to conduct financial transactions, Iranian banks—and, consequently, Iranian companies and individuals—were severely cut off from international trade.

    A country’s economy, the value of its currency, and people’s ability to go about their daily lives might all be severely harmed by SWIFT sanctions.

    Risks of SWIFT Sanctions

    The case of Iran also illustrates the drawbacks or hazards associated with employing a SWIFT shutdown as a diplomatic tactic. Iran was shut off from many facets of international trade, but other countries that Iran does business with also felt the effects of these sanctions. The reach of this influence depends on how closely a nation is connected to the global financial system; the more interconnected a sanctioned nation is with other countries, the bigger the ripple effect.

    Some world leaders demanded that Ukraine be shut off from SWIFT in 2014 after Russia annexed the Crimean Peninsula. These calls started up again in early 2022 after Russia invaded Ukraine. These instances and Iran above differ greatly from one another in that Russia has a significantly larger economy and is more interconnected globally than Iran. The impact of SWIFT sanctions on other nations would be enormous because Russia’s top exports are gas and oil, both of which are essential to Europe’s survival. As a result, there is less motivation to apply SWIFT sanctions in this situation.

    Alternatives to SWIFT Sanctions

    Detractors of the use of SWIFT sanctions claim that excluding organizations or even a whole nation from the messaging system does not stop criminals from transacting internationally. It merely makes the procedure more challenging. Although they are less efficient, there are SWIFT alternatives. Following the aforementioned events in 2014, Russia apparently created its own SWIFT substitute, potentially reducing the utility of a SWIFT blockade even more.

    Some researchers claim that bank sanctions may have a greater impact than disconnecting institutions from SWIFT. Targeting financial firms that serve as go-betweens for powerful people and governments might have a more immediate and destructive effect, so the theory goes.

    How do Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) sanctions work?

    Financial institutions may not use the messaging service provided by the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT). These institutions are consequently forced to utilize a different option, which is probably slower, less secure, and less connected. Institutions are still allowed to facilitate transactions notwithstanding SWIFT sanctions; nevertheless, not having access to the SWIFT platform might be quite difficult.

    Who controls SWIFT sanctions?

    A neutral cooperative, SWIFT collaborates with thousands of financial institutions around the globe. It functions in accordance with Belgian legislation, and thus EU law. In other words, it implements EU sanctions.

    What are the downsides to SWIFT sanctions?

    The efficiency of SWIFT sanctions is one drawback. SWIFT cannot prohibit nations or financial organizations from completing transactions, as was already mentioned. Institutions may be able to come up with workarounds, especially in recent years as cryptocurrencies have become more and more useful for international transactions. Furthermore, it may be challenging to restrict SWIFT sanctions to a certain nation or group of institutions. Sanctions against one country have a negative effect on other nations as well because of the global structure of the financial sector.

    Learn more: 6 Features Your Primary Bank Should Have