Brad Garlinghouse is bullish on stablecoins. Circle’s IPO is a big win for crypto. GENIUS Act about to pass out of committee. Sounds great, right? The regulatory headwinds are becoming tailwinds. Ripple wants clear regulation. We welcome Hong Kong and Korea to the new stablecoin legislation party. What if this positive narrative hides a much more sinister side, a quiet digital neo-colonialism? What if instead, the U.S. is obfuscating under the guise of consumer protection? They may be setting themselves up to control the world’s stablecoin market, and that would be detrimental to developing countries.

GENIUS Act: Genius For Whom Exactly?

The GENIUS Act… even just the title oozes hubris. While proponents tout it as a necessary step to legitimize stablecoins and protect investors, I can't help but wonder: who really benefits? The U.S. banking system? Circle's shareholders? Or the lady entrepreneur in London who wants to get paid from abroad without extortionate charges.

The narrative is that regulation brings stability. But stability for whom? For U.S. financial institutions that view stablecoins as an existential menace to their supremacy? The unspoken reality, however domestic in purpose, the GENIUS Act will have global impact, for better or worse. It sets a precedent. It creates a framework that other nations, particularly those with less developed regulatory infrastructure, will likely emulate or be pressured to adopt.

This isn’t just about compliance — it’s about control. Instead, the U.S. is trying to dictate the terms of the digital economy. This would severely hamper innovation and curtail freedom of finance in the very countries where it is arguably needed the most.

Africa's Financial Inclusion: A Casualty?

Imagine a scenario: A smallholder farmer in Ghana uses a stablecoin-based platform to receive payments for her crops directly from buyers in Europe, bypassing expensive and inefficient traditional banking systems. She then uses those stablecoins to access microloans to invest in her farm. Stablecoins and DeFi offer tremendous opportunity for the Global South. They can promote financial inclusion for the unbanked and underbanked, and help to elevate marginalized communities.

Imagine if the GENIUS Act becomes the global standard It’s tough reserve, KYC/AML and licensing requirements will serve as a high-water mark for all. Can small, innovative projects in Africa designed to improve remittance flows and capitalize on local use cases scale to compete. And will they really have the capacity to chart through the new thicket of complex regulations? I doubt it.

The end result would be a concentration of power in the stablecoin market. Large, U.S.-based issuers will continue to dominate, squeezing out smaller players and limiting access to these vital financial instruments to those who need them most. It’s the digital equivalent of making developing countries use the U.S. dollar, deepening U.S. economic dominance.

Sovereignty Lost, Control Gained

We’re constantly told that regulation is needed to keep the black market at bay and protect consumers. To be clear, nobody wants to see stablecoins used for money laundering or financing terrorism. At what cost?

This effort to introduce a global stablecoin regulation regime, largely driven by the U.S., should greatly concern any country about their economic sovereignty. Are we setting a precedent where the U.S. gets to decide how other countries will adopt crypto technology? In exchange for ensuring U.S. regulatory compliance, are we trading away the promise of financial innovation in the Global South?

Entrepreneurs, farmers and hardworking citizens of the continent are the unheard voices in this discussion. They stand to lose the most from a U.S.-centric, siloed approach to stablecoin regulation. We need to ask ourselves: is the pursuit of stability worth sacrificing financial freedom and economic sovereignty? Are we sleepwalking into a future where the U.S. controls not just the global financial system, but the very fabric of the digital economy?

  • U.S. Influence: The GENIUS Act could become a template for global regulation, giving the U.S. undue influence.
  • Innovation Stifled: Over-regulation could kill small, innovative stablecoin projects in developing countries.
  • Financial Exclusion: Increased compliance costs could make stablecoins less accessible to marginalized populations.

The forgotten voices in this debate are those of the entrepreneurs, farmers, and ordinary citizens in Africa who stand to lose the most from a U.S.-centric approach to stablecoin regulation. We need to ask ourselves: is the pursuit of stability worth sacrificing financial freedom and economic sovereignty? Are we sleepwalking into a future where the U.S. controls not just the global financial system, but the very fabric of the digital economy?