新华社北京12月13日电 欧盟理事会12日发表的一份声明显示，欧盟决定无限期冻结俄罗斯在欧盟的资产。这为欧盟动用俄被冻结资产资助乌克兰 扫除了一大障碍。对此，俄罗斯外交部发言人扎哈罗娃直言欧盟是"骗子"。 在定于本月18日举行的欧盟峰会上，欧盟领导人将研究利用俄罗斯被冻结资产为所谓"赔偿贷款"作担保，从而满足乌克兰未来两年的财政和军事 需求。 无限期冻结2100亿欧元俄资产 欧尔班："欧盟法治走向终结" 欧盟理事会12日发表的声明称，欧盟理事会当天紧急决定，暂时禁止将冻结在欧盟境内的俄罗斯中央银行资产转移回俄罗斯。该决定没有说明期 限。而在该决定出台前，欧盟冻结俄资产的制裁措施须每六个月经27个成员国一致同意才能得以续期。 欧洲理事会主席科斯塔在社交媒体上说，欧盟领导人承诺维持俄罗斯资产的冻结状态，直到俄罗斯结束与乌克兰的冲突并赔偿所造成的损失。 据欧洲媒体报道，该决定涉及的俄罗斯中央银行资产价值约为2100亿欧元。 据塔斯社报道，俄总统普京此前曾表示，欧盟所讨论的没收俄罗斯资产是"盗窃行为"。（记者：康逸、丁英华、魏忠杰） 俄方：欧盟将承担后果 俄罗斯负责对外投资和经济合作事务的总统特别代表德米特里耶夫表示 ...

（原标题：哥伦比亚总统积极评价哥加入亚投行） 综合哥伦比亚媒体报道，近日亚洲基础设施投资银行（亚投行）理事会批准哥伦比亚加入该行的申 请，哥正式成为该金融机构第111个成员。11月20日，佩特罗总统在其X平台表示祝贺并指出，通过参 与全球最广泛金融体系，哥方将降低国家脆弱性，推动实现"世界生命强国"目标，开辟进步繁荣广阔机 遇。 ...

Core Insights - The forum emphasized the importance of international financial governance and cooperation in response to current global challenges [1][2][3] Group 1: Key Themes from the Forum - The need for collaboration among countries to achieve win-win outcomes in addressing global challenges was highlighted by China's Vice Governor Lu Lei [1] - China has become a core member of international financial governance, contributing to global financial security through various initiatives such as IMF reform and sovereign debt coordination [2] - The global financial system is evolving towards diversification and innovation, necessitating enhanced cooperation and experience sharing among central banks and regulatory bodies [2][3] Group 2: Perspectives from Key Speakers - BIS representative Zhang Tao noted that governance capabilities will determine the outcomes of rapid technological changes in finance [3] - Edward Robinson from the Monetary Authority of Singapore pointed out that trade policy uncertainty remains high, and Asian economies must deepen trade openness and enhance productivity [3] - Daranee Saeju from the Bank of Thailand suggested establishing a resilient and interconnected regional financial system to address cross-border payment and fraud issues [4] Group 3: China's Role and Future Directions - The forum underscored China's commitment to reforming and improving the existing international financial governance system to make it fairer and more inclusive [4] - HSBC's representative emphasized Hong Kong's role as a hub for offshore RMB and cross-border investment, supporting the financial development cycle between the mainland and Hong Kong [4] - Shanghai University of Finance and Economics' president highlighted the need to view changes in international financial governance through a long-term lens, focusing on reform and improvement [4]

Core Viewpoint - The potential replacement of the US dollar is not solely dependent on China, but rather on global needs, especially if the US continues to implement unilateral measures that create uncertainty in international trade and finance [1][4]. Group 1: Global Financial System - The current global financial and trade system is predominantly based on the US dollar, which serves as a measurement and reserve currency established post-World War II [3][4]. - China, as the world's second-largest economy and the largest trading nation, is concerned with both its own development and the stability of the global financial system [3][4]. Group 2: Renminbi Internationalization - If more countries begin to use the renminbi as a unit of account, it will be a natural evolution driven by global needs rather than a unilateral push from China [4]. - The use of renminbi in trade is seen as beneficial not only for China but also for countries that engage in trade with China, highlighting a mutual advantage [3][4]. Group 3: China's Role - China's primary focus is on its own economic development, aiming to become a significant force for global stability and development [4]. - The country does not seek to challenge the existing financial system unless faced with unilateral actions from the US that create instability [4].

Core Viewpoint - The potential impact of China selling its $1.1 trillion in U.S. Treasury bonds could be catastrophic for the market, causing significant psychological and financial repercussions [1][14][22]. Group 1: U.S. Treasury Market Overview - As of Q1 2024, the U.S. bond market has a total balance of $56.1 trillion, surpassing the combined holdings of China and Japan [3]. - The daily trading volume of U.S. Treasuries can reach $500 to $600 billion, indicating a robust market, but a sudden influx of $1.1 trillion from China would equate to nearly two days' worth of trading [5][14]. - Foreign investors hold less than 30% of U.S. Treasuries, with the majority being purchased by U.S. investors, which allows for greater control over the market [5]. Group 2: China's Holdings and Actions - China began purchasing U.S. Treasuries in 1978, becoming the largest foreign holder by 2008, peaking at over $1.1 trillion in 2011 [6]. - Currently, China's holdings have decreased to approximately $759 billion, the lowest level since 2009, reflecting a gradual reduction strategy [8]. - The trend of reducing U.S. Treasury holdings is evident among major holders like Japan and the UK, with foreign ownership dropping to 24.31% [8]. Group 3: Historical Context and Market Reactions - Russia's experience in selling U.S. Treasuries during the 2014 Crimea crisis and again in 2018 showed that the market's reaction can be muted, as other investors often step in to absorb the sell-off [10][12]. - The scale of China's potential sell-off is vastly different, as $1.1 trillion represents the total net sales of U.S. Treasuries by global central banks over the past 26 months [14]. Group 4: Economic Implications - A sudden sell-off by China could lead to a significant drop in Treasury prices, resulting in higher yields that would impact U.S. economic conditions, including increased borrowing costs for businesses and consumers [16][17]. - The Federal Reserve's response could involve purchasing Treasuries to stabilize the market, but this could lead to inflationary pressures and undermine the dollar's credibility [17]. Group 5: Strategic Considerations for China - China holds a significant amount of U.S. Treasuries but risks substantial losses if the market collapses, as it is deeply integrated into the global financial system [21][24]. - The strategy of gradual reduction and diversification of foreign reserves is seen as a more prudent approach, allowing China to maintain strategic flexibility while minimizing risks [26][28]. - China's long-term goals include establishing a more equitable international financial system and promoting the internationalization of the yuan, which requires a stable external environment [24][28].

Core Insights - Gold has experienced a record-breaking rally, significantly influenced by declining confidence in the US dollar [1] Group 1: Factors Driving Gold's Rise - Eroding confidence in the US dollar is a primary driver of gold's price increase [1] - The global financial system is being impacted by the surge in gold prices, indicating a shift in investor sentiment [1] Group 2: Implications for the Financial System - The rise in gold prices may signal broader economic concerns and a potential reevaluation of asset values [1] - Investors are increasingly turning to gold as a safe-haven asset amid uncertainties in the financial markets [1]

Core Argument - The article discusses the limitations of the theory of equality, suggesting that equality is more of a "luxury" in wealthy and secure societies rather than a universally applicable policy goal [2] Group 1: Historical Context - The United States, despite being the wealthiest and most secure country, is the most unequal among OECD countries, raising questions about the "American exception" [2] - Historical examples of countries that tolerated inequality for wealth include Britain during the Industrial Revolution, China post-reform, and the Roman Empire [3][4] Group 2: Cultural and Structural Factors - The American social contract is based on the promise of future wealth rather than equality, supporting the "American Dream" [5] - Cultural roots in the U.S. hinder the establishment of a redistributive social contract, making it difficult to adopt a Nordic model of equality [6][12] Group 3: Unique American Model - The U.S. model of inequality is sustainable only as long as it maintains its global leadership; other countries cannot easily replicate this model without facing strategic competition [7][8][11] - The U.S. can tolerate inequality due to its technological leadership and global dominance, which provides legitimacy to its system [9][13] Group 4: Lessons for Other Countries - Other nations should not mimic the U.S. model of inequality; instead, they should seek a balance between growth, innovation, and manageable inequality to ensure social stability [10][15]

Group 1 - The recent claim by American media that "China owes the U.S. over $1 trillion" is rooted in a historical debt from over a century ago, which is being used as a political tool rather than a realistic financial threat [1][3] - The original debt dates back to 1911 when the Qing government borrowed £6 million for railway construction, which became a contentious issue after the fall of the Qing dynasty [1][3] - The debt was briefly acknowledged by the Republic of China but was ultimately abandoned due to political instability and the establishment of the People's Republic of China, which rejected the debt as a product of unequal treaties [3][5] Group 2 - The current U.S.-China tensions have led to renewed discussions about this historical debt, with some suggesting that the U.S. could threaten to refuse payment on the $759 billion in U.S. Treasury bonds held by China [5][7] - China's holdings of U.S. debt have decreased significantly, down by $557.7 billion from their peak, indicating a reduced reliance on U.S. Treasury securities [5][7] - The potential refusal to pay China could destabilize the global financial system, as it would undermine trust in U.S. debt and could trigger a sell-off of U.S. bonds by other countries [5][7] Group 3 - The U.S. relies heavily on the trust of its allies in its financial credibility, and any breach of this trust could jeopardize the dollar's dominance and the U.S.'s military alliances [7] - In contrast, China has developed a stronger resilience to economic risks due to its experience with economic sanctions, positioning it better in a potential economic confrontation [7] - The political rhetoric surrounding the historical debt appears to be more about creating a narrative than a genuine financial strategy, as any drastic action could backfire on the U.S. itself [7]

Group 1 - The forum highlighted the importance of the global financial system in mitigating geopolitical risks and ensuring the stability of international trade and supply chains [4] - The discussions emphasized the need for China to enhance its participation in global economic governance and strengthen international cooperation to counter systemic risks [4] - The forum presented various expert analyses on the definition and dimensions of geopolitical economic risks, noting the lack of a unified academic definition [7][8] Group 2 - The analysis revealed that geopolitical economic risks have a multifaceted impact on macroeconomics and financial markets, with positive effects on CPI and negative impacts on PPI, stock markets, exports, and FDI [10] - Research indicated that geopolitical economic risks lead to significant adverse spillover effects on China's financial markets and real economy, with key transmission channels identified as exchange rates, real estate, and credit markets [13][19] - The findings suggested that a moderately accommodative monetary policy could mitigate the negative impacts of geopolitical economic risks, while stabilizing the real estate and bond markets could prevent a ratchet effect [13] Group 3 - The forum discussed the transformation of the global trade and investment system due to geopolitical economic risks, leading to a decline in bilateral trade volumes and a shift in trade structures [18] - Empirical studies showed that trade barriers have reached peak levels since World War II, with significant adjustments in international trade patterns, particularly in U.S.-China trade [18][19] - The analysis pointed out that geopolitical risks have accelerated the restructuring of supply chains towards "nearshoring, friend-shoring, and diversification," emphasizing the need for security in supply chain management [19] Group 4 - The discussions included the impact of financial sanctions and geopolitical economic risks on the global payment system, highlighting the inefficiencies and risks associated with the SWIFT system [22] - The analysis indicated that the rise of geopolitical risks has led to a diversification of reserve currencies, with emerging currencies like the RMB gaining traction, although the USD remains a dominant safe haven [25][29] - The forum underscored the necessity for structural reforms and infrastructure optimization to enhance the RMB's international competitiveness and safe-haven attributes [30]

Core Viewpoint - The rise of stablecoins is reshaping the global financial landscape in the digital age, reflecting a dual tension between market credit and state credit, and leading to a new equilibrium in monetary functions and governance [1][2][10]. Group 1: Nature of Stablecoins - Stablecoins represent a compromise between market and state credit, allowing for the issuance of "quasi-currency" under regulatory frameworks in places like the US and Hong Kong [11]. - The evolution of stablecoins has transitioned from algorithmic stability and collateralized assets to a mainstream model anchored by fiat currencies, indicating a reliance on state credit for stability [10][11]. Group 2: Impact on Global Financial System - Stablecoins may lead to a redefinition of monetary functions, pushing sovereign currencies to reassess their roles and promoting a "functional division" in the global monetary system [12]. - The distribution of financial power could shift, with the potential emergence of a multi-currency system comprising "sovereign currencies + scenario-based stablecoins," challenging the dominance of a single currency [13]. - Stablecoins signify a transformation in the relationship between state, market, and technology, suggesting that monetary power is no longer solely state-controlled but is influenced by technological intermediaries [14]. Group 3: US Interest in Stablecoins - The US's enthusiasm for stablecoins is closely tied to maintaining the dollar's dominance, as stablecoins can convert market credit into monetary power, especially in light of rising national debt [15][16]. - The use of short-term US Treasury bonds as collateral for stablecoins could alleviate liquidity pressures on US debt, reinforcing the dollar's global status [15]. - The US is positioning itself to dominate the "metaverse currency" landscape, with stablecoins potentially becoming the universal currency in digital economies, thereby extending dollar hegemony into the digital realm [18]. Group 4: China's Strategic Response - China should develop a stablecoin strategy that aligns with its economic context, focusing on supply chain advantages and ensuring that stablecoins serve the real economy [19][20]. - Collaboration between stablecoins and the digital yuan is essential, with both aiming to enhance the integration of digital and real economies [20]. - A strategy of "innovation-led + inclusive collaboration" is recommended for developing a stablecoin ecosystem that balances risk and efficiency while leveraging China's manufacturing strengths [21].