BITCOIN, STABLECOINS, AND THE DOLLAR: THE NEW MONETARY POWER GAME

Dollar strength, Bitcoin–stablecoin “marriage,” and the future of global money

In my recent interview on France 24 Arabic, we discussed the sharp pullback in crypto markets and what it really signals about Bitcoin, stablecoins, central-bank policy, and the global monetary landscape.

Why crypto can swing so violently

When people say “crypto market,” they often mean Bitcoin—because Bitcoin still represents a large share of the sector’s total value, alongside Ethereum and stablecoins. But an important nuance is liquidity: the portion of supply that is actually trading is much smaller than headline supply numbers. That makes the market structurally more sensitive to flows. In other words, relatively limited buying or selling pressure can generate outsized price moves, which is why you can see abrupt drawdowns even when the long-term narrative hasn’t changed.

The first driver: interest rates and the return of “predictable yield”

The primary macro factor behind the recent decline is the level of interest rates—especially at the U.S. Federal Reserve, and also across Europe and Japan. When policy rates stay elevated, capital naturally rotates toward predictable, modelable returns (short or long maturities) and away from higher-risk assets. Bitcoin remains a risk asset in the way many portfolios treat it: when yields offer a clearer, less volatile alternative, some investors de-risk.

The second driver: mining economics and post-halving pressure

The dynamics of Bitcoin mining also matter. After each halving (every four years), the daily issuance is cut in half. This is structurally bullish for Bitcoin’s scarcity, but it can be painful for miners in the short run—especially those with higher costs or weak balance sheets. That pressure can force some miners to sell more Bitcoin than they produce, simply to fund operations or avoid insolvency. In periods like this, miner-driven selling can amplify market weakness.

The third driver: geopolitics, expectations, and the “buy the rumor, sell the news” effect

Markets often “buy the rumor and sell the news.” Expectations around political leadership can fuel rallies long before policy outcomes are visible. That helps explain why you can see a contradiction between supportive political messaging and short-term price declines. Strategy and market timing are not the same thing.

From a strategic perspective, the United States has clear incentives to lead the crypto economy—especially across two vectors:

• Accumulating and controlling meaningful crypto liquidity and infrastructure (mining capacity and industry concentration).

• Shaping the next monetary layer through privately issued, dollar-backed stablecoins—rather than a retail central bank digital currency.

CBDCs vs stablecoins: two radically different paths

Europe has leaned heavily into regulation (notably MiCA) and central-bank digital currency initiatives. The U.S., by contrast, has pushed toward a private-sector stablecoin model and has been hostile to the idea of a retail CBDC. This choice is not merely ideological—it’s geopolitical.

Dollar-backed stablecoins create direct structural demand for U.S. Treasury instruments when reserves are invested in safe dollar assets. In practical terms, global stablecoin usage can reinforce dollar dominance by exporting the dollar’s unit of account into digital markets—while channeling reserves into U.S. government financing mechanisms. This is part of why I describe the current moment as a “marriage” between Bitcoin on one side (a scarce, global bearer asset) and stablecoins on the other (a programmable dollar distribution layer).

“Crypto is used for crime”: what the numbers suggest

A frequent accusation is that crypto is primarily a tool for money laundering or terrorism financing. Reality is more nuanced. Blockchains are transparent by design: transactions are visible and traceable, and analytics can follow flows with remarkable precision. Illicit activity exists—like it does in any financial system—but the claim that crypto is uniquely “dirty” ignores both traceability and the scale of illicit finance in traditional currencies.

Is this downturn “dangerous,” or a healthy reset?

I view the current decline as a cleansing phase more than a structural break. Excess leverage, especially through derivatives (high leverage multiples), tends to get flushed out when price moves sharply. Forced liquidations are painful, but they can be healthy in resetting market structure.

Bitcoin and gold: diversification, not ideology

I do not give investment advice. But I do share how I think about the role of Bitcoin: I see it as “digital gold”—scarce by design and increasingly behaving, in some contexts, like a long-duration hedge asset in the digital era.

For those who choose exposure, the key is time horizon and risk capacity:

• If your horizon is short, Bitcoin is not the place to rely on.

• If your horizon is longer, disciplined sizing matters—only allocating what you can tolerate being volatile.

• In a diversification mindset, it’s reasonable to consider gold and Bitcoin as belonging to a similar “store-of-value” bucket, with different risk profiles.

A major point raised in the interview was the growing institutional attention to this diversification question: as finance evolves, the debate is shifting from “Bitcoin or gold?” to “How do portfolios balance both in a world of digital liquidity and changing monetary regimes?”

Full interview (in arabic here) : https://youtu.be/t4AacpYZpMA?si=N84Zh5c2qxmjbhUG

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4AacpYZpMA