Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Stablecoins and the New Currency Cold War

Opinion

USD Coin Stock Market Ticker Crypto World 1

Stablecoins like Tether are reshaping global finance—expanding dollar access, challenging banks, and testing U.S. dominance in a shifting digital economy.

Getty Images, Joseph Kelly

Last week, Tether, the world’s largest dollar-backed stablecoin, claimed it had reached 500 million users. That figure, while hard to verify, reflects a growing reality: in countries like Argentina, Nigeria, and Turkey, people are turning to digital dollars not to speculate, but to survive. Inflation eats away at savings, banks are unreliable or inaccessible, and local currencies often fail to hold value. In these places, stablecoins offer a lifeline.

What started as a niche experiment in cryptocurrency has grown into a $300 billion market. That’s larger than the GDP of many countries. Stablecoins now serve as a kind of shadow dollar system, operating outside traditional banking channels. They settle transactions in seconds, run 24/7, and offer transparency through public blockchains. In regions where correspondent banking networks are shrinking, these tokens fill a critical void.


Optimists believe stablecoins could replace legacy payment systems within a decade. That’s not just a technical shift - it’s a geopolitical one. The United States has taken notice. In July, President Trump signed the GENIUS Act, a law that regulates “payment stablecoins” and requires issuers to hold reserves in high-quality assets like Treasury bills. It also gives holders priority in case of insolvency. The goal is clear: to reinforce demand for U.S. Treasuries and preserve the dollar’s role as the world’s reserve currency.

But the dollar’s dominance is no longer guaranteed. Its share of global central bank reserves has dropped to 56 percent, the lowest in 30 years when adjusted for currency fluctuations. Sanctions on Russia have pushed countries to explore alternatives, including China’s CIPS payment system. SWIFT still handles most cross-border transactions in dollars, but its grip is weakening. Stablecoins, by contrast, extend dollar access to the unbanked and underbanked, potentially locking in U.S. influence in places where traditional banking has failed.

Still, the strategy has cracks. The idea that stablecoins will drive massive demand for U.S. Treasuries is shaky. Tether holds around $130 billion in short-term Treasury bills - just 2 percent of the total market. Even if the stablecoin sector doubles, it would still only absorb short-term debt. The long-term funding that Washington relies on comes from central banks and allied governments. There is little evidence that stablecoins are replacing these traditional buyers.

There’s also a risk that the Treasury could become too dependent on short-term debt. Issuing more bills might save money in the short run, but it increases rollover risk. These instruments mature quickly, requiring constant refinancing. If interest rates spike or markets panic - as they did in March 2020 - the government could face a liquidity crunch at the worst possible time.

And then there’s the question of stability. Stablecoins are essentially digital IOUs, backed by reserves that users must trust. That trust can evaporate quickly. In October, Ethena’s USDe, the third-largest stablecoin, dropped to 65 cents during a wave of liquidations. It recovered, but only after hours of chaos. Holders of these tokens don’t have senior claims in bankruptcy. They’re unsecured creditors. Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey has warned about the risk of “digital bank runs” and the lack of transparency in reserves. The IMF has echoed those concerns, urging caution as stablecoins gain traction.

For developing countries, the risks are even greater. Dollar stablecoins could trigger a new wave of dollarization, similar to what Latin America experienced in the 1980s or Asia in the late 1990s. When the Federal Reserve raises interest rates, local currencies weaken, and the economic pain deepens. Governments lose control over their monetary policy, becoming beholden to decisions made in Washington.

The GENIUS Act may bring regulatory clarity in the U.S., but many stablecoin issuers operate in legal gray zones abroad. Security flaws remain a concern - hacks, phishing attacks, and lost keys are common. Even central bank digital currency pilots have struggled to move beyond limited trials and speculative use.

Tether’s reach is enormous. With $182 billion in circulation and annual profits approaching $15 billion, it has become a major player in global finance. It offers financial inclusion in places where banks won’t go. But by outsourcing dollar access to private companies, the U.S. is tying its currency to their fortunes. That means exposure to market volatility, regulatory uncertainty, and the risk of sudden collapses.

Washington is betting that digital dollars will reinforce its global position. JPMorgan estimates that stablecoins could generate $1.4 trillion in added demand by 2027. But history offers plenty of cautionary tales. Easy money often ends in crisis. Stablecoins may represent American innovation, but they also expose vulnerabilities in the financial system.

This is the paradox of our time. Tools that empower individuals and nations can also deepen dependence on U.S. policy and reveal weaknesses at home. If stablecoins are governed wisely, they could reshape how the dollar functions in the world. If not, they may slowly undermine it. The choice lies with Washington - and with the rest of the world watching closely.


Imran Khalid is a physician, geostrategic analyst, and freelance writer.


Read More

A gavel.

Analysis of President Donald Trump’s tariffs after a record $901.5B U.S. trade deficit in 2025. Explore the economic realities behind trade imbalances, the United States Supreme Court ruling on tariff authority, and the growing debate over executive power and trade policy.

Getty Images, Phanphen Kaewwannarat

What’s Next After the Court’s Tariffs Decision?

A Stubborn Imbalance

After a year of President Trump’s sweeping tariffs, sold as a reset of global trade, the promise was simple: the U.S. trade deficit would shrink. It did not. The Commerce Department instead reported a $70.3 billion deficit in December and a staggering $901.5 billion for all of 2025, one of the largest totals on record. The gap between imports and exports barely narrowed at all.

These figures matter because they undermine the central premise of the strategy: make imports more expensive, reduce foreign purchases, and bring production back to the United States. But that approach overlooks a key reality. Trade balances are not driven by tariffs alone. They reflect deeper forces such as consumer demand, domestic savings rates, the strength of the dollar, and global capital flows. Those forces do not yield easily to executive action.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump Frames Economy As ‘Stronger than Ever Before’ in State of the Union, but Lawmakers Question the Claim

President Donald Trump delivered his State of the Union address before a joint session of Congress on Tuesday night.

(Cayla Labgold-Carroll/MNS)

Trump Frames Economy As ‘Stronger than Ever Before’ in State of the Union, but Lawmakers Question the Claim

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump used the longest State of the Union address in U.S. history on Tuesday night to argue that Americans are already experiencing “a turnaround for the ages” thanks to his agenda. But moments of disruption inside the House chamber and reactions from lawmakers afterward suggested Democrats and even some Republicans dispute his claims.

Trump’s address offered a snapshot of how the White House is trying to frame the economy heading into an election year. The administration sought to present easing inflation, falling prices, and rising wages as settled facts.

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Capitol

A shrinking deficit doesn’t mean fiscal health. CBO projections show rising debt, Social Security insolvency, and trillions added under the 2025 tax law.

Getty Images, Dmitry Vinogradov

The Deficit Mirage

The False Comfort of a Good Headline

A mirage can look real from a distance. The closer you get, the less substance you find. That is increasingly how Washington talks about the federal deficit.

Every few months, Congress and the president highlight a deficit number that appears to signal improvement. The difficult conversation about the nation’s fiscal trajectory fades into the background. But a shrinking deficit is not necessarily a sign of fiscal health. It measures one year’s gap between revenue and spending. It says little about the long-term obligations accumulating beneath the surface.

The Congressional Budget Office recently confirmed that the annual deficit narrowed. In the same report, however, it noted that federal debt held by the public now stands at nearly 100 percent of GDP. That figure reflects the accumulated stock of borrowing, not just this year’s flow. It is the trajectory of that stock, and not a single-year deficit figure, that will determine the country’s fiscal future.

What the Deficit Doesn’t Show

The deficit is politically attractive because it is simple and headline-friendly. It appears manageable on paper. Both parties have invoked it selectively for decades, celebrating short-term improvements while downplaying long-term drift. But the deeper fiscal story lies elsewhere.

Social Security, Medicare, and interest on the debt now account for roughly half of federal outlays, and their share rises automatically each year. These commitments do not pause for election cycles. They grow with demographics, health costs, and compounding interest.

According to the CBO, those three categories will consume 58 cents of every federal dollar by 2035. Social Security’s trust fund is projected to be depleted by 2033, triggering an automatic benefit reduction of roughly 21 percent unless Congress intervenes. Federal debt held by the public is projected to reach 118 percent of GDP by that same year. A favorable monthly deficit report does not alter any of these structural realities. These projections come from the same nonpartisan budget office lawmakers routinely cite when it supports their position.

Keep ReadingShow less
A New Democratic Approach: Guardrails That Speed, Not Stop, Progress

A take on permitting reform, deregulation, and DHS accountability—arguing for economic growth with guardrails that protect communities, health, and the environment.

Getty Images, Javier Ghersi

A New Democratic Approach: Guardrails That Speed, Not Stop, Progress

For far too long, our national conversation has been framed around a false choice. On one side, Republicans frequently argue that the best way to strengthen the economy and improve the lives of everyday Americans is to give businesses maximum freedom by having fewer rules, fewer constraints and more incentives to grow. On the other side, Democrats have stressed the need for guardrails to protect our environment, our health, and our communities from the unintended effects of unchecked growth.

But this debate has always been too narrow. It assumes that we must choose between action and accountability, between getting things done and doing them responsibly.

Keep ReadingShow less