A Warning from Riga: Payment Infrastructure as a Strategic Asset

Piero Cipollone, Member of the European Central Bank (ECB) Executive Board, delivered a stark warning about Europe's payment system autonomy at a public lecture hosted by the Stockholm School of Economics in Riga on April 1, 2026. He argued that dependence on non-European financial infrastructure poses not merely an economic risk, but a geopolitical vulnerability—and made the case for the digital euro as Europe's answer.

Cipollone opened by invoking Latvia's history with the euro. In 2014, at the height of the eurozone crisis, Latvia made a strategic choice to adopt the euro—a decision rooted not just in monetary policy but in sovereignty. The conviction: small nations can strengthen their independence by voluntarily sharing sovereignty with trusted partners.

From Energy to Payments: A Recurring Lesson in Infrastructure Dependency

Cipollone used the Baltic states' energy dependence as his central analogy. The region's long reliance on a single external supplier (Russia) turned overnight into a strategic liability. After diversifying energy supply, the Baltics learned a critical lesson: a country must control its infrastructure to shield itself from decisions made elsewhere.

He argued this lesson has echoed across Europe's economy—supply chains, semiconductors, critical raw materials—and must now be applied to payments.

Three Vulnerability Mechanisms of Non-European Payment Dependency

Cipollone outlined three concrete mechanisms through which dependence on non-European infrastructure creates vulnerability:

1. Disconnection Risk. Non-European infrastructure providers can unilaterally revoke access. Since payments are essential to daily life and economic activity, even the threat of disconnection can give third parties leverage over Europe.

2. Extraterritorial Reach. Globally integrated infrastructure allows one country's legal framework to propagate into others. Cipollone cited the recent case of International Criminal Court judges who experienced firsthand the inability to use bank cards or conduct routine transactions.

3. Unilateral Exercise of Market Power. International card schemes unilaterally set fees, technical standards, and dispute resolution procedures governing hundreds of millions of European transactions daily. European merchants and payment service providers are, in effect, rule-takers with little recourse.

Autonomy ≠ Protectionism

Cipollone was explicit: strengthening Europe's payment autonomy is not protectionism. It is about ensuring Europeans have a sovereign payment infrastructure they can always rely on—one that provides a sound foundation for open competition and innovation, not market closure.

The Road Ahead for the Digital Euro [AI Analysis]

The digital euro debate has accelerated alongside rising geopolitical tensions. Since 2022, the weaponization of dollar and euro payment networks through sanctions on Russia has underscored the need for an independent EU payment infrastructure.

Cipollone's remarks signal that the ECB is now framing the digital euro not merely as a fintech innovation but as a geopolitical defense tool. The ECB is likely to accelerate digital euro legislation and technical preparation post-2025. Friction with incumbent international card networks such as Visa and Mastercard appears increasingly likely.

For non-European payment markets, the implications are significant. Should Europe succeed in building its own payment infrastructure, global payment market multipolarity may accelerate. Central bank digital currency (CBDC) competition is likely to shift from a technology race to a race for payment sovereignty.