Military Review

Transferable ruble

9
The transfer ruble was the first large-scale project to create a supranational monetary unit. Other supranational monetary units appeared later. So in this matter, our country was ahead of the rest.


Transferable ruble

The building of the CMEA in Moscow. Early 1970's

The transfer ruble, which has been in effect since January 1964, is a collective unit of account, the collective currency of the CMEA countries, intended to serve the system of their multilateral settlements. Introduced by agreement signed on October 22 1963 by the governments of Bulgaria, Hungary, GDR, Mongolia, Poland, SRR, USSR and Czechoslovakia. After joining the CMEA, the Republic of Cuba and Vietnam also joined this agreement.

Calculations in the PR began from January 1 1964 of the year through the International Bank for Economic Cooperation (IBEC) by transferring the funds expressed in them from the account of one country to the account of another. The gold content of the transferable ruble was established in 0,987412 of pure gold. PR was a unit of account and served as the scale of prices of goods in the mutual trade between the CMEA countries.

In a specific subject form (for example, in the form of banknotes, treasury notes or coins), the transfer ruble was not circulated. The source of receiving the transferable ruble for each country was the crediting of the import of its goods and services by the countries participating in the multilateral payment system. The basis of the settlement system in transferable rubles was formed by the multilateral balancing of commodity deliveries and payments.

It was the first large-scale project to create a supranational monetary unit. Other supranational monetary units appeared later. I mean, first of all, the so-called Special Drawing Rights, usually denoted by the abbreviation SDR (Special Drawing Rights). The SDR is the monetary unit that has become issued by the International Monetary Fund for settlements between the member countries of the fund.

At the time of the emergence of a new system of international accounting units, the value of a SDR unit was tied to gold and amounted to 0,888671 g of pure metal, which corresponded to the value of 1 US dollar. The first release of the CRA launched 1 on January 1970 of the year. Then, some have assumed that over time, the SDR will become the main global currency. However, today the volume of SDRs is extremely small, the share of this monetary unit in international reserves of all countries of the world does not exceed 1%.

From time to time, various politicians and officials make statements that the condition for overcoming the current crisis of international finances is a sharp increase in the issue of SDRs by the International Monetary Fund, which SDRs should become world money. Such statements were made, for example, by the recent IMF director Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

Of course, such proposals are in contradiction with the interests of the main owners of the “printing press” of the Fed, who by all means struggle to preserve the status of international money by the US dollar. It was at the direction of the owners of the Fed, Strauss-Kahn, expelled from the fund and destroyed politically.
Ten years later (after the SDR), a supranational ECU unit appeared in Europe, and in 1992, a supranational currency called the euro (Maastricht Agreement) was born within the European Union. Initially, it was intended only for international non-cash payments. For some time, the euro currency unit coexisted with the national currency units, but later the national money was abolished.

Today, the 17 states of Europe, which constitute the so-called Eurozone, use the euro both for international settlements and for internal circulation.
If you compare the euro with the transferable ruble, you should note that the latter did not rule out and did not limit the use of national money by the CMEA member countries. There was no encroachment on the national sovereignty of the countries participating in the union.

The PR was in international circulation for 27 years - from 1964 to 1990 a year. The scale of the use of PR in those days was immense. The total volume of transactions and operations using a new type of currency for the specified period amounted to 4,5 trillion transfer rubles, which is equivalent to 6,25 trillion dollars.
The use of PR is constantly increasing. If in the first five years of PR existence (1964 – 1969 years) the volume of operations was 220 billion units, then in the last five years (1985 – 1990 years) it is already 2100 billion units (equivalent to almost 3 trillion dollars).

Thus, the turnover of PR grew almost 10 times.

In the 1985 – 1990 period, according to the UN, the average annual turnover of all international trade was about 6 trillion dollars. And the average annual volume of foreign trade of the CMEA countries using the transferable ruble is 310 billion dollars (see: SM Borisov. The ruble is the currency of Russia. - M .: Konsaltbankir, 2004. - C. 126).


Postage stamp dedicated to the Economic Conference of the CMEA member countries at the highest level. 1984 year

Therefore, over 5% of international trade in the world in the last five years of the existence of the CMEA was provided with the help of a transferable ruble.
In transferable rubles, the cost indicators of contracts for the supply of goods, the provision of services, the implementation of construction and other works were expressed, estimates and feasibility studies of many joint projects were drawn up.

Secondly, the transfer ruble was the currency of payment. The corresponding amounts were transferred from the accounts of buyers (importers) and customers and credited to the accounts of sellers (exporters) and contractors. Payment transactions were carried out with the participation of the IBEC.

Thirdly, the transfer ruble is credit money. They fell into circulation in the form of loans of some countries to others for the supply of goods and for investment projects. Consequently, with the help of PR, the debts and obligations of countries and individual enterprises and organizations, participants of trade and economic relations were expressed.

It is noteworthy that in the framework of the CMEA countries sought to ensure the most balanced trade in order to prevent excessive accumulation of debts of individual countries in transferable rubles.

In addition, with the help of PR, the capital of such international banks as IBEC and the International Investment Bank (IIB) was formed, and the activities of a number of international organizations in the framework of the CMEA were financed.


Soviet propaganda poster

Just as the national currencies of the CMEA member countries could not participate in international settlements, the transfer ruble could not under any circumstances be used in the internal circulation of these countries.

How is this tool useful? He helped the economy to maintain independence from Western markets, from international crisis processes. 1960's experience does not need to be copied, but it is necessary to use it to our advantage.
Author:
Originator:
http://историк.рф/special_posts/переводной-рубль-тайное-оружие-ссср/
9 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Koshak
    Koshak 28 May 2016 07: 10
    +5
    "Why is this tool useful? It helped the economy to maintain independence from Western markets, from international crisis processes. The experience of the 1960s does not need to be copied, but it must be used in our interests."
    Only those who must act in the public interest do not consider it necessary to learn from this experience.
    1. atalef
      atalef 28 May 2016 13: 53
      +1
      Quote: Koshak
      "Why is this tool useful? It helped the economy maintain independence from Western markets, from international crisis processes.

      Absolutely not a fact, the economic crisis in Poland (in the early 80s) was not looking at the country's entry into CMEA.
      It was the popka of the association and the common market of social countries.
      The lack of advanced technologies and a raw materials economy is new and it could not be successful.
      The non-cash trade carried out by the countries of the socialist camp for decades led to the fact that almost all CMEA members were confident that they were being deceived, that their country was giving more than it was receiving. Social integration led to the leveling of the economies of the CMEA member countries: the strong lost and the weak won. If we compare the economic situation in the countries of Eastern Europe in 1928 (the peak of the pre-war economic recovery) and in 1970 (the most successful period of CMEA functioning), it turns out that the share of Eastern European countries in world industrial production increased from 6,6 to 8,6 % At the same time, the share of Romania increased from 0,3 to 1%, Bulgaria - from 0,1 to 0,6%, the share of Hungary - 0,36 to 0,6%, while the share of Czechoslovakia decreased from 1,7 to 1,5 , 2,8%, and the GDR - from 2,4 to XNUMX%

      For the USSR and Russia, CMEA played a dual role. On the one hand, the USSR turned out to be the owner of a debt of 15 billion rubles. The fact is that in 1975-1985, the bloc's partners owed the USSR 15 billion rubles. For the period from 1986 to 1990, the roles changed: now the Soviet Union owed 15 billion rubles. Since the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance ceased to exist at a time unfavorable for the USSR, it was he who had to pay off his debts. On the other hand, the USSR gained experience in creating an organization that regulates the economic activities of several countries.
  2. ism_ek
    ism_ek 28 May 2016 09: 32
    +2
    How is this tool useful? He helped the economy to maintain independence from Western markets, from international crisis processes. 1960's experience does not need to be copied, but it is necessary to use it to our advantage.
    At the moment, there is no sense in transferable rubles, because ruble and so freely convertible currency. Another thing is whether we need the current, freely convertible ruble. Yuan, like the Soviet ruble, is not a freely convertible currency, and this does not prevent China from being the second economy in the world.
    1. Cat man null
      Cat man null 28 May 2016 18: 28
      -1
      Quote: ism_ek
      Yuan ... not freely convertible currency

      Quote: https://lenta.ru/articles/2015/12/02/yuan/
      Yuan became the IMF's new reserve currency

      Mdya .. I have a gap pattern, campaign ..
  3. stopkran
    stopkran 28 May 2016 11: 28
    +1
    For those who are in the tank again: “The gold content of the transferable ruble was set at 0,987412 g of pure gold.” and not green candy wrappers, as the current ruble is now, which are secured only by a debt obligation i.e. nothing.
    1. EvgNik
      EvgNik 28 May 2016 18: 05
      -1
      Quote: stopkran
      For those who are in the tank again: “The gold content of the transferable ruble was set at 0,987412 g of pure gold.”

      And on the "black market" (which was also the USSR), he went 1 to 10 of our rubles, (this is approximately, at different times in different ways). My brother walked the seas and received part of his salary in checks, these very transferable rubles. You could buy them either abroad or in the Beryozka stores.
  4. Nross
    Nross 28 May 2016 13: 59
    +1
    It is noteworthy that in the framework of the CMEA countries sought to ensure the most balanced trade in order to prevent excessive accumulation of debts of individual countries in transferable rubles.

    - But this is in vain. The competition between the CMEA countries was killed in the bud, I suspect, at the expense of the "main payer" - the Russian people.
    Neither industrial, nor climatic (and, accordingly, agricultural), nor human resources were equal. Why cut everything under one comb?
    The Soviet Union stumbled over the economy, which they tried to "fairly" align between the members of the Soviet bloc. Probably they were afraid to underfeed someone, so that it would not run away to the opposing camp ...
    Dosyusyukali with crooks and loafers - the country was prosrali.

    That blacks in Africa approx. Gave $ 100 billion (old pre-issue) and how did it end? Actually, why did they give dollars, not rubles ...?
    1. Cat man null
      Cat man null 28 May 2016 18: 33
      0
      Quote: Nross
      why did they give dollars, not rubles ...?

      Because rubles outside the borders of the Union were not especially needed by anyone .. because they couldn’t be bought for them there ..

      Somehow request
  5. Just a man
    Just a man 21 February 2017 22: 19
    0
    A veiled way of keeping parasites at the expense of the USSR. If control of the issue of money of this fraternity was legally added to this transferable ruble, it would be different. And so, after the collapse of the CMEA, we only left it with a bare ass and billions of debts to all these rogues, right down to Bulgaria. Not bad they were when 200 gr. a can of green peas cost more than 10 liters of oil.