Multipolar financial architecture: cluster analysis of alternative payment systems

Objective: to analyze current trends in the formation of alternative cross-border payment systems in the context of geopolitical fragmentation, sanctions pressure, and the formation of narratives of financial sovereignty of states. The author pays special attention to the role of Central Bank digital currencies (CBDC), digital financial assets and multilateral platforms as tools for de-dollarization and the creation of a multipolar global financial architecture.
Methods: the research applies general scientific methods of cognition (analysis, synthesis, system approach, modeling), an interdisciplinary approach involving theories of international relations (neorealism, world-system analysis, institutionalism, constructivism), as well as cluster analysis of geopolitical strategies and comparative study of architectures of digital payment initiatives (including the Bank for International Settlements projects like mBridge, Dunbar, Jura).
Results: the article identifies the main vectors, targets and tools for the implementation of alternative payment projects; assesses the advantages and risks of the Bank for International Settlements initiatives; and identifies four main geopolitical clusters with differing strategies for the development of digital payment systems: American-European (defensive), AsiaPacific (innovative and expansionist), Middle East (Sharia-oriented) and Latin American (inclusive). The author showed that the key barriers to the creation of universal alternative systems are regulatory inconsistency, technological incompatibility, and geopolitical opposition. Russia’s strategy is defined as “selective integration”, using points of intersection of interests between clusters to ensure financial sovereignty.
Scientific novelty: for the first time, an integrative model for the analysis of alternative payment systems was proposed, combining structural, ideological, strategic and domestic policy levels. The author introduced an original typology of geopolitical clusters of digital payments and substantiated the concept of “selective integration” as Russia’s strategy in a multipolar financial order.
Practical significance: the research results can be used in the development of national and international policies in the field of digital finance, in the formation of strategies for the creation of interstate payment platforms (within BRICS, SCO, and EAEU), as well as in the design of legal and technological solutions to ensure financial stability and sovereignty under the sanctions pressure.

1. Amin, S. (1989). Delinking: Towards a Polycentric World. London: Zed Books Press.

2. Arauz, A. (2021). The International Hierarchy of Money in Cross-Border Payment Systems: Developing Countries’ Regulation for Central Bank Digital Currencies and Facebook's* Stablecoin. International Journal of Political Economy, 50(3), 226–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/08911916.2021.1984728

3. Baranovskiy, V. G. (2025). On the Formation of a New World Order. Polis. Political Studies, 1, 7–23. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2025.01.02

4. Bech, M., Boar, C., Eidan, D., Haene, P., Holden, H., & Toh, W. K. (2023). Using Central Bank Digital Currencies Across Borders: Lessons From Practical Experiments. Journal of Payments Strategy & Systems, 17(1), 46–57. https://doi.org/10.69554/reyy9560

5. Boar, C., Claessens, S., Kosse, A., Leckow, R., & Rice, T. (2021). Interoperability Between Payment Systems Across Borders. BIS Bulletin, 49, 1–10.

6. Chu, Y., & Rathbun, N. (2025). Monetary Sovereignty and Central Bank Digital Currencies: Competing Models for Future Cross-Border Payment Platforms. Global Policy, 16, 329–340. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13495

7. Deych, T. L. (2018). China in Africa: Neo-Colonial Power or a “Win-Win” Strategy? Outlines of Global Transformations: Politics, Economics, Law, 11(5), 119–141. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.23932/2542-0240-2018-11-5-119-141

8. Eremin, A. A. (2021). Peripheral realism of Carlos Escudé. Cuadernos Iberoamericanos, 9(1), 50–61. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.46272/2409-3416-2021-9-1-50-61

9. Farrell, H., & Newman, A. (2019). Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion. International Security, 44, 42–79. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00351

10. Gromova, E. A. (2024). Model of Legal Regulation of Clusters in the Russian Federation. Russian Journal of Economics and Law, 18(1), 121–133. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21202/2782-2923.2024.1.121-133

11. Hurrell, A. (2006). Hegemony, liberalism and global order: what space for would-be great powers? International Affairs, 82(1), 1–19.

12. Karpinskaya, V. A. (2024). Ecosystem style of thinking in economic analysis: principle of unity of the continuous and the discrete. Russian Journal of Economics and Law, 18(4), 863–875. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21202/2782-2923.2024.4.863-875

13. Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (2001). Power and Interdependence. New York – London.

14. Kirdina-Chandler, S. G. (2022). Unipolarity, Multipolarity, and Bipolar Coalitions. XXI Century. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 10, 3–16. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.31857/S013216250022645-2

15. Kochergin, D. A. (2024). Central Bank Digital Currencies for Cross-Border Payments: Interoperability Models and Implementation Possibilities. Finance: Theory and Practice, 28(2), 82–100. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.26794/2587-5671-2024-28-2-82-100

16. Kochergin, D. A., & Andryushin, S. A. (2024). Prospects for international settlements in central bank digital currencies on a platform basis in foreign countries and Russia. Vestnik Instituta Ekonomiki Rossiyskoy Akademii Nauk, 6, 156–185. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2024_6_156_185

17. Konyshyev, V. N. (2004). On Kenneth Waltz’s Neorealism. Polis. Political Studies, 2, 146–155. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2004.02.14

18. Korolev, A. A., & Kudryashov, A. A. (2025). Dynamics of Cryptocurrency Market Interdependence with the Global Economy in the Context of Global Economic-Political Shocks. Russian Journal of Innovation Economics, 15(2), 645–660. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18334/vinec.15.2.122309

19. Kosse, A., & Mattei, I. (2023). Making Headway – Results of the 2022 BIS Survey on Central Bank Digital Currencies and Crypto. Bank for International Settlements. https://www.bis.org/publ/bppdf/bispap136.htm

20. Kravchenko, S. A. (2024). The emergence of the synergistically complex power in digital era: challenges to human capital. Polis. Political Studies, 2, 65–79. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2024.02.06

21. Kuznetsov, A. V. (2024). Currency Hegemony as a Tool of US Global Dominance. The World of New Economy, 18(1), 69–79. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.26794/2220-6469-2024-18-1-69-79

22. Manushin, D. V. (2024). Anti-Sanctions and Sanctions Economic Policy of Russia 2022–2025. Part 2: Aftermaths of sanctions war, management of changes, clarification of research concepts. Russian Journal of Economics and Law, 18(1), 36–69. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21202/2782-2923.2024.1.36-69

23. Maslov, A. V., & Shvandar, K. V. (2023). New International Projects on the Use of Central Bank Digital Currencies in Transforming Cross-Border Settlements. Financial Journal, 15(2), 47–58. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.31107/2075-1990-2023-2-47-58

24. Mearsheimer, J. (1995). A Realist Reply. International Security, 20(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.2307/2539218

25. Onishchenko, A. O. (2021). Ideational Institutionalism: Explaining Institutional Transformations During a Crisis. Bulletin of Perm University. Political Science, 2, 5–15. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17072/2218-1067-2021-2-5-15

26. Sergeev, V. M., Kazantsev, A. A., & Medvedeva, S. M. (2020). Territorial Heterogeneity of Globalization and the Types of Conflicts. Polis. Political Studies, 1, 44–61. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2020.01.04

27. Sidorenko, E. L. (2023). DeFi-Crime: condition, trends and criminological models. Russian Journal of Economics and Law, 17(2), 327–341. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21202/2782-2923.2023.2.327-341

28. Sidorenko, E. L. (2025). China’s Digital Silk Road Initiative: Directions and prospects of development, advantages and risks for Russia. Russian Journal of Economics and Law, 19(1), 57–79. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21202/2782-2923.2025.1.57-79

29. Tsypkankov, P. A. (2002). Theory of International Relations. Moscow: Gardariki. (In Russ.).

30. Tumanyan, Y. R., Korytsev, M. A., & Ipatova, A. V. (2025). Geo-economics and Neoliberalism: Theory, Methodology, Practice. Russian Journal of Economics and Law, 19(3), 488–502. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21202/2782-2923.2025.3.488-502

31. Vallerstein, I. (2006). World-Systems Analysis: An Introduction. Moscow: Territoriya budushhego. (In Russ.).

32. Volchik, V. V., & Shiriaev, I. M. (2025). Economic Ideology and Economic Policy in the Mirror of Narratives. Russian Journal of Economics and Law, 19(3), 469–487. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21202/2782-2923.2025.3.469-487

33. Waltz, K. (1979). Theory of International Politics. New York.

34. Wendt, A. (2015). Flatland: Quantum Mind and the International Hologram. In M. Albert et al. (Eds.), New Systems of World Politics (pp. 279–310). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

35. Yakovlev, P. P. (2021). Global South: Conceptual Approaches and Socio-Economic Processes. Outlines of Global Transformations: Politics, Economics, Law, 14(2), 6–27. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.23932/2542-0240-2021-14-2-1