“China needs to build a powerful currency that could be widely used in international trade, investment and foreign exchange markets, and attain reserve currency status,” Xi Jinping, January 2026
The hegemony of the United States dollar has long been the bedrock of global economic stability, functioning as a “global public good” that facilitates seamless trade and investment. However, two seminal 2026 papers published via the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace suggest that this foundation is beginning to crack. In “The US Dollar System as a Source of International Disorder,” (Link) Daniel Davies and Henry Farrell argue that the strategic weaponization of the dollar has transformed it from a stabilizing force into a primary driver of global friction. Complementing this view, Alexander Evans’ “The Hollow Dollar?” (Link) explores the internal structural decay of the currency’s institutional reliability. Together, these works present a troubling portrait of a financial superpower at a crossroads, where short-term geopolitical leverage may be coming at the cost of long-term systemic integrity.
- From Homeostasis to Disorder
Davies and Farrell frame the post-WWII financial system as originally homeostatic—meaning it possessed self-regulating feedback loops that maintained stability even when faced with external shocks.
- The Original Goal: Dollar centrality (using the dollar as the “vehicle currency” for global trade) was intended to lower transaction costs and create a predictable environment for all nations.
- The Shift: After 9/11, the US began “weaponizing” this centrality. By controlling the “plumbing” of global finance—such as the SWIFT network and dollar clearing banks—the US gained the power to sever adversaries from the world economy.
- The “Weaponization” Feedback Loop
The core of their paper describes a dangerous cycle that has replaced the old stability:
- Exploitation: The US leverages dollar centrality for national security (e.g., aggressive sanctions on Russia, Iran, or North Korea).
- Circumvention: Fearing they might be the next target, other countries—including allies like the EU—take steps to evade US power by building alternative payment systems or diversifying reserves.
- Escalation: The US perceives this evasion as a threat and “doubles down,” scaling up financial coercion to force countries back into the system.
“The more that other countries look to escape US financial coercion, the more the US will scale it up to pin them into place.”
- Key Disruptors: Private Actors and Tech
Farrell and Davies highlight two modern factors accelerating this disorder:
- Bank Over-Compliance: Terrified of US fines, global banks have adopted “zero-risk” policies. This “de-risking” often cuts off legitimate businesses in developing nations, fueling resentment and the search for alternatives.
- Cryptocurrency & Digital Assets: The introduction of US-backed stablecoins and other digital assets provides new, less-regulated avenues. While these make the system harder for the US to control, they also increase overall volatility.
- The Structural Decay: “The Hollow Dollar?”
While Davies and Farrell focus on strategic breakdown, Alexander Evans focuses on structural decay. Evans argues that while the dollar still appears dominant on the surface, it is becoming “hollow.”
- The Illusion of Centrality: High reserve percentages are “lagging indicators.” The dollar’s utility is declining as “mini-systems” (like BRICS-pay or the digital yuan) handle more local trade.
- Decoupling from Values: As US domestic politics become more volatile and transactional, the dollar loses its “safe haven” status and its identity as a global public good.
- The “Sudden Snap” Risk: Evans suggests the dollar will not decline gradually. Like a hollowed-out structure, it may maintain its form until a specific crisis causes it to “snap” due to a lack of internal trust.
Conclusion
The synthesized findings of Davies, Farrell, and Evans suggest that the US is currently trading its long-term financial credibility for short-term geopolitical wins. If the dollar system is indeed a “source of disorder,” then the “hollow dollar” is the inevitable, fragile result. By treating the global financial infrastructure as a bureaucratic weapon of first resort, the United States risks incentivizing a multipolar world split between incompatible currency blocs. Ultimately, if the US continues to prioritize coercion over the maintenance of a rules-based order, it may find itself presiding over a fragmented global economy where the dollar remains central in name only, stripped of the trust that once gave it power.



