Why US-backed stablecoins have China wary of a potentially more dominant dollar
Amid the explosive growth of cryptocurrency in the past few years, continued focus from high-level figures reflects the Chinese government's interest in underlying technologies and their potential role in cross-border finance, despite cryptocurrency trading being banned on the mainland.
'Although other countries are considering issuing their own local-currency stablecoins, their potential global impact remains uncertain, whereas USD-backed stablecoins could have worldwide influence,' said Zhou, the architect of many of China's early financial reforms, at the
Lujiazui Forum in Shanghai on Wednesday. 'USD-backed stablecoins may facilitate US dollarisation, and the effects of this remain highly debated.
'Unless facing extreme, dire circumstances – such as [fighting] high inflation or heavy debt burdens – pursuing dollarisation could bring many adverse side effects.'
The US Senate this week
passed landmark stablecoin legislation that, for the first time, established federal guardrails for US dollar-pegged stablecoins, creating a regulated pathway for private companies to issue digital dollars with the blessing of the federal government.
Zhou Xiaochuan, former governor of the People's Bank of China, attends a plenary session during the 2025 Lujiazui Forum on Wednesday in Shanghai.
Unlike volatile cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin or ethereum, whose prices experience drastic fluctuations, stablecoins aim to combine the efficiency of digital assets with the reliability of traditional money. By pegging their value to fiat currencies such as the US dollar or Hong Kong dollar, or to other reserve assets, stablecoin prices are meant to live up to their name – as long as the currency behind them remains strong.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
AllAfrica
11 minutes ago
- AllAfrica
India's hand in Trump tariff row stronger than it looks
On August 6, US President Donald Trump signed an executive order doubling tariffs on most Indian exports to the United States, raising the rate from 25 to 50%. The decision, set to take effect later this month, was justified on grounds of trade imbalances and New Delhi's continued discounted purchases of sanctioned Russian oil. The escalation marks the sharpest deterioration in US-India trade relations in decades. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has denounced the measures as 'unfair and unjustified,' noting that other major buyers of Russian crude have not been penalized. 'We will protect our farmers and our domestic interests, even if we must pay a heavy price,' he told a rally in Gujarat in response to the tariffs. Within days, India announced a pause on planned US defense acquisitions — a not-so-subtle signal that its strategic options extend far beyond the Pentagon's procurement lists. Senior officials have begun mapping out a menu of counter-moves, from limited retaliatory tariffs to deeper integration with BRICS partners and other non-Western economies. To understand why India is in no rush to fold, it is worth taking stock of how the balance of power has shifted. First, BRICS itself has shaped into a US$32.5 trillion economic coalition after the addition of Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Indonesia. The enlarged group now represents roughly 30–40% of global GDP and accounts for over a fifth of world trade. This is not yet a substitute for the G7 ($46.8 trillion), but it is a credible alternative pole. Second, while the US dollar remains dominant, accounting for around 58% of global reserves and cross-border transactions, its share has been steadily declining, from 72% in 2000. India's trade with Russia, which surged to around $65–69 billion last fiscal year, is increasingly settled in rupees and rubles, bypassing the dollar entirely. Similar currency-swap arrangements with the UAE and other partners are quietly expanding. Third, India's role in critical global supply chains gives it built-in leverage. The country produces about 60 percent of the world's generic medicines and exported $28 billion worth of pharmaceuticals in 2023–24. Its IT and ICT services exports, worth roughly $150 billion annually, are heavily embedded in US corporate operations, from Silicon Valley's software pipelines to Wall Street's back-office systems. Tariffs on Indian goods thus risk boomeranging onto American companies and consumers. Modi's real advantage lies in what analysts such as Nishant Rajeev call 'multi-alignment' or 'optionality,' the skill of pivoting among multiple partners and platforms without locking into any single one. India's External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar framed this strategic agility in Foreign Policy as the freedom to choose partners based on interests rather than on emotion or prejudice. India's $3.4 trillion economy and 1.4 billion market give it scale; its BRICS membership, combined with Quad, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and G20 roles, gives it reach. This unique positioning allows New Delhi to keep one foot in the Western security architecture while cultivating deep ties to Russia, Iran, the Gulf, and Central Asia. Optionality has a financial dimension too: the more India settles trade in local currencies, the less exposed it is to US financial leverage. That, in turn, blunts the coercive edge of both sanctions and tariffs. Washington's wager appears to be that punitive tariffs will force India into strategic compliance. History suggests otherwise. Sustained tariff wars often prompt global supply chains to reroute, and the early signs here point to a similar outcome. Rather than isolating India, higher tariffs may accelerate the very multipolarity the US seeks to contain. Trade diversion toward BRICS partners, the Gulf and ASEAN could deepen alternative payment systems and standards. Politically, the optics of coercion from Washington may play into Modi's domestic narrative of sovereign resilience, especially in the run-up to state elections. There are domestic costs for the US as well. More expensive Indian pharmaceuticals could raise healthcare costs, while disruption in IT services risks operational headaches for US firms. In a tight labor market for STEM talent, alienating a country that produces over half a million new engineering graduates each year is a questionable move. Seen through this lens, Trump's tariff escalation risks becoming a strategic own goal. It undermines the bipartisan effort of the past two decades to position India as a counterbalance to China. It also introduces uncertainty into defense cooperation, just as Washington is seeking to strengthen maritime deterrence in the Indo-Pacific via essentially the Quad. More fundamentally, it sends a message that US economic statecraft is increasingly zero-sum, a framing that will nudge other swing states toward hedging strategies. In that world, India will not stand alone: it will be joined by BRICS and several mid-sized powers seeking insulation from great-power coercion. If Trump's goal is actually to keep India close, a more sophisticated approach would blend incentives with calibrated pressure. That could mean reviving stalled trade talks, offering targeted supply-chain co-investment in sectors like semiconductors and AI and easing market-access irritants in agriculture and services. Such engagement would not preclude firm conversations about Russia, but it would avoid the trap of punitive measures that push India further into BRICS and alternative coalitions. Modi's India will not back down from a challenge; it will build around it. The more the West applies pressure, the more New Delhi is likely to deepen its ties with BRICS and other non-Western coalitions that offer strategic autonomy in a multipolar world. Ricardo Martins holds a PhD in sociology with a specialization in geopolitics and international relations and an advanced studies certificate in international trade. He is based in the Netherlands.
South China Morning Post
an hour ago
- South China Morning Post
Hong Kong suspends bottled water deal with mainland firm, files police report
Hong Kong authorities have suspended a newly granted drinking water supply contract with a mainland Chinese company and reported the matter to police. Advertisement The Government Logistics Department said on Saturday that it doubted Xin Ding Xin Trade Company could fulfil its obligations under the 36-month contract, which was granted to it just two months ago. The agreement stipulates the supply of bottled drinking water to government offices on Hong Kong Island and some outlying islands, starting from the end of June. It was one of the first contracts of its kind granted to a mainland firm, beating long-time supplier, AS Watsons Group, a subsidiary of Li Ka-shing's CK Hutchison Holdings. 'Due to operating information recently obtained about Xin Ding Xin Trade Company, the Government Logistics Department does not believe that the company will be able to continue performing the contract and has decided to suspend it according to the terms of the contract,' it said. 'The department will continue to follow up on the case seriously, so it could take further action, including whether to terminate the related contract. The Government Logistics Department has already referred the matter to the police for investigation.' Advertisement The department noted that AS Watson would temporarily take over and supply water to the affected government offices from next week.
South China Morning Post
an hour ago
- South China Morning Post
Hong Kong suspends drinking water supply deal with mainland Chinese firm, calls police
Hong Kong authorities have suspended a drinking water supply contract with a mainland China-based company just two months after granting it, reporting it to police. The Government Logistics Department said on Saturday that it doubted Xin Ding Xin Trade Company could fulfil its obligations under the 36-month contract requiring the supply of bottled drinking water to government offices on Hong Kong Island and some outlying islands, starting from the end of June. It was the first contract of its kind granted to a mainland firm, beating long-time supplier, AS Watson. 'Due to operating information recently obtained about Xin Ding Xin Trade Company, the Government Logistics Department does not believe that the company will be able to continue performing the contract and has decided to suspend it according to the terms of the contract,' it said. 'The department will continue to follow up on the case seriously, so it could take further action, including whether to terminate the related contract. The Government Logistics Department has already referred the matter to the police for investigation.' The department noted that AS Watson would temporarily take over and supply water to the affected government offices from the next week.
