C Raja Mohan: In India, needed, a crypto strategy
As India tries to understand the second Trump administration's unexpected enthusiasm for renewing ties with Pakistan, an unusual development is drawing global attention: An ambitious — and somewhat surreal — cryptocurrency collaboration between Pakistan and World Liberty Financial Inc (WLFI), a firm tied to the Trump family.
WLFI, reportedly run by Donald Trump's children and Zack Witkoff — the son of Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff — signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) last month with the Pakistan Crypto Council, formed in March. The WLFI delegation was warmly received in Islamabad and Lahore, with meetings involving both PM Shehbaz Sharif and Army Chief Asim Munir. The MoU outlines sweeping plans to use blockchain technology to promote financial inclusion, monetise untapped national assets such as rare earths, introduce stablecoins for remittances and trade, and position Pakistan as a regional crypto hub.
The viability of these plans remains uncertain, given the parlous state of Pakistan's economy. But India should pay close attention to Pakistan's crypto ambitions — especially amid the possible misuse of these digital currencies not controlled by any central bank to fund terror and launder money across borders. Far more consequential, however, is the potential transformation of the global financial order triggered by the Trump administration's new crypto policy. Cryptocurrencies, once dismissed as a financial fad, have now become disruptive instruments in global finance. Their decentralised architecture, rapid innovation, and increasing adoption are reshaping monetary policy, regulatory frameworks, and cross-border economic flows.
In his second term, Trump has moved swiftly to reposition the US as a global leader in digital assets. During his campaign, Trump reversed his earlier scepticism of crypto and promised to dismantle the Biden-era hostility toward the sector. The crypto industry, sensing a huge opportunity, rallied behind him. Within days of assuming office, Trump issued two executive orders that reshaped America's crypto strategy. The first order codified a national blockchain innovation strategy, curtailed regulatory overreach, and banned the development of a central bank digital currency (CBDC). It also formed the President's Working Group on Digital Asset Markets, chaired by the White House's 'AI and crypto czar', David Sacks, to design a new regulatory framework within six months.
The second order created a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and a US Digital Asset Stockpile to consolidate government-seized crypto assets such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana. This initiative aimed to turn digital assets into national reserves akin to gold, without tapping into taxpayer funds. In supporting lawful, dollar-backed stablecoins while explicitly banning CBDCs, Trump seeks to ensure sustained dominance of the US dollar in the international system.
Trump's appointments — including pro-crypto figures like Elon Musk and Sacks — signal a major shift in Washington. The Securities and Exchange Commission paused its lawsuits against major exchanges like Coinbase and Binance, while the Justice Department dissolved its crypto enforcement team. Markets responded with enthusiasm: Bitcoin surged past $74,000 in March 2025 and is valued this week at more than $100,000.
Adding a personal twist to his crypto strategy, Trump also launched a meme coin —$TRUMP— turning himself into a direct stakeholder in the crypto surge. Meanwhile, WLFI is reaching out to many countries, including Pakistan, for deals on crypto. Until recently, Pakistan showed little interest in cryptocurrencies, having banned or restricted them like India. But that has changed dramatically. In early 2025, the government appointed a young British Pakistani entrepreneur Bilal bin Saqib to lead the Pakistan Crypto Council. This week, Saqib was appointed special adviser to Pakistan's Prime Minister and tasked with creating a regulatory framework to promote crypto adoption. Estimates suggest Pakistan may have up to 25 million crypto users and a market worth $2 billion.
Even with a stagnant economy, an underdeveloped financial sector, and limited technological capabilities, Pakistan appears determined to carve out a niche in the emerging crypto world. The strategy includes cultivating its diaspora in the US, particularly tech entrepreneurs who now serve as a conduit to the Trump administration. At a recent diaspora convention — Pakistan's first, modelled after India's Pravasi Bharatiya Divas — Munir reaffirmed the ideological foundations of Pakistan's statehood and signalled a reassertion of influence abroad.
While the Indian diaspora's tech influence is well known, Pakistan's diaspora is now making moves of its own — leveraging crypto to rekindle Pakistan's ties with the US, which had frayed under both the Trump and Biden administrations. India should not dismiss these developments as inconsequential. In the 1970s, Delhi underestimated Pakistan's nuclear ambitions, assuming it lacked the scientific and technological base.
By the late 1980s, Pakistan had developed nuclear weapons and leveraged them to create a challenging security environment for India. More urgently, India needs to reflect on its own crypto strategy — or the lack of it. There has been little public discourse on the geopolitical and technological implications of crypto. This lack of government engagement contrasts with the growing number of crypto users in India, estimated to be more than 100 million, and a market size of nearly $7 billion.
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court stepped into this breach. In hearing the bail petition of Shailesh Bhatt, a Gujarat resident accused of cryptocurrency fraud, the Court remarked on the Centre's paradoxical policy of taxing crypto assets without developing a regulatory framework. It warned that the legal and policy vacuum on cryptocurrencies would create serious challenges to India's economy and security. India no longer has the luxury of ignoring the changing regional and global crypto landscape. Delhi needs to come to terms with Pakistan's new digital pivot and Trump's plans to refashion the global financial order with crypto and related technologies.
(The writer is a distinguished fellow at the Council on Strategic and Defence Research and a contributing editor on international affairs for The Indian Express)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
12 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Staying the course on trade pacts with the UK and US
The uncertainty unleashed by Donald Trump's tariffs has only been aggravated by a spate of recent court rulings. On May 28, the US Court of International Trade struck down Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariffs, saying that the emergency law (International Emergency Economic Powers Act) does not give the President the power to impose broad tariffs. However, a day later, a federal appeals court temporarily reinstated the tariffs. The case is now likely to work its way through the US legal system. The uncertainty is likely to linger on as the 90-day pause on the Liberation Day tariffs ends in the second week of July. The Trump administration may have hoped that some trade deals would be quickly negotiated. And while the US and the UK have reached an agreement — the deal was announced on May 8th — progress with other major trading nations/blocks remains a protracted process. Take the case of China. A few days ago, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is reported to have said that trade talks between the US and China 'are a bit stalled'. Last Friday, Trump said that China has 'totally violated' its agreement with the US, a charge that China has rejected. The US President is expected to speak to Chinese President Xi Jinping this week to iron out their differences. In the case of Japan, several rounds of talks have taken place, and another is expected before the G7 summit. But last Friday, the legal challenges to his tariffs notwithstanding, Trump also raised the tariffs on steel and aluminium to 50 per cent, potentially impacting countries such as Canada, Mexico and South Korea, which account for a sizeable share of US steel imports. A day later, the European Union, which had agreed to 'accelerate talks' on a US trade deal, has also responded firmly, saying it is prepared to impose 'countermeasures' against the US. It noted that such moves to increase tariffs 'undermine ongoing efforts to reach a negotiated solution'. The new tariffs are effective from June 4. These latest tariff moves come at a time when India and the US are negotiating a bilateral trade deal. A US team is expected to visit India over the coming few days. On Monday, US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, speaking in Washington at the US-India Strategic Partnership Forum's leadership summit, said that a deal between the US and India could happen in the 'not too distant future'. The India-EU trade deal also appears to be on course. As per a report, the two sides have agreed on several chapters, and the pact could be concluded before the end of the year. Coming after the finalisation of the India-UK agreement, the successful culmination of these deals would increase the country's attractiveness as an investment destination.
Indian Express
12 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Why Trump has changed his tune on Iran
After less than two months in office, US President Donald Trump made a 'sudden' offer to Iran's Supreme Leader for direct US-Iran talks on the Iranian nuclear weapons programme and easing of US sanctions. So far, five rounds of US-Iran talks have been led by the US Special Envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. Though the talks remained on track up to the third round, both sides started hardening their stances before the fourth round, held just a day before Trump's three-nation Gulf tour. However, it was before the fifth round that both drew irreconcilable red lines about Iranian enrichment capability. While Witkoff stressed that Iran can't have any enrichment capability, Araghchi tweeted 'no enrichment, no deal'. Despite serious doubts, the fifth round took place on May 23. It appears that the talks did not collapse and both sides have taken back proposals to ponder over. Will the talks continue and could they succeed? In 2015, the US and other global powers had stitched together a Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action (JCPOA) deal with Iran to bring its nuclear programme under stricter international inspections. This was to ensure that Iran pursued only a peaceful civil nuclear programme. In return, Iran got relief from the sanctions. However, in 2018, based on 'consultation with Middle Eastern allies' — a reference to Saudi Arabia and Israel — Trump had walked out of the deal unilaterally, calling it 'defective'. Other parties to the deal could not salvage it and, faced with US sanctions, Iran reduced its openness to international scrutiny. The geopolitics of the Middle East has undergone a sea change since Trump's first term and so has his approach to solving conflicts. The genocide in Gaza has united the Sunni Arab states behind a two-state solution. China has successfully brokered a Saudi-Iran rapprochement. Iran has gone on a diplomatic overdrive to build a better understanding with Sunni Arab states, including on its nuclear programme. These factors created favourable conditions for US-Iran talks. Just before his Gulf tour, Trump had hinted at potential consultations with Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar on the issue. During his tour, Saudi foreign minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan al Saud publicly supported the US-Iran talks. In Doha, applauding the Emir of Qatar's strong push for diplomacy with Iran, Trump assured protection of Qatar's interests. In early March, Qatar PM Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani had warned against targeting Iranian nuclear facilities as that could contaminate the waters of the Gulf and threaten the lives of people in Qatar, the UAE and Kuwait. The three states with minimal natural water reserves depend on desalinated water drawn from the Gulf. Apart from other factors, Trump has also done favours for the Gulf states to try and secure their backing for the US-Iran nuclear deal. This includes ongoing talks for a Saudi nuclear deal, a six-month waiver on sanctions for Syria and a personal meeting between Trump and Syrian interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa (once a designated person) along with the Saudi crown prince. More importantly, the US has its own security interests riding on a good deal with Iran. A detailed assessment made by the US Intelligence Community (IC) put out in March portrayed Iran as part of a pack of 'adversaries' — along with Russia, China and North Korea — 'who were individually and collectively challenging US interests'. The assessment observed that growing cooperation between and among these adversaries was increasing their 'fortitude against the United States (and so was)… the potential for hostilities with any one of them drawing in another', and pressuring other global actors to choose sides. Engaging Iran as a part of a broader axis that includes Russia may be an important factor guiding Trump's aggressive diplomacy while upping trade and non-trade wars with China. The assessment also concluded that Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, wants to avoid embroiling Iran in an 'expanded, direct conflict' with the US and its allies and has not yet authorised a nuclear weapons programme that he had suspended in 2003. Iran, as per the assessment, was not building a nuclear weapon and can't do it without a decision by the Supreme Leader. However, Iran was likely to continue research and development of chemical and biological agents for offensive purposes. At the start of the talks, Witkoff had publicly stated that Iran did not need more than 3.67 per cent enriched uranium for civil nuclear purposes and that verification was required for 'reported' enriched uranium up to 20 per cent and 60 per cent. He also outlined the need for verification on weaponisation, delivery systems and nuclear triggers that Iran might possess. Iran's establishment has a lot riding on maintaining enrichment capability for peaceful uses as well as asserting its sovereignty to its people. In addition to 3.67 per cent enriched uranium, Iran, like other nations, would also like to make or be able to import around 20 per cent enriched uranium for medical use. The discussions appear to be now focussed on 'specificities' and hence, will require tough negotiations by both parties. By taking maximalist positions, both sides seem to be insulating this sensitive phase of negotiations from potential sabotage. Trump, too, has said he 'warned' Israel against any pre-emptive strikes on Iranian nuclear sites to give US diplomacy a chance to succeed. (The writer is a security analyst and former director general of police)
Mint
16 minutes ago
- Mint
MAGA policies would make America mediocre
'MAGA" was always an insult to the United States. Make America great again? Wasn't this country great when Donald Trump rode down that escalator in 2015? Now, as Trump 2.0 unfolds, the president seems intent on turning this insult into a reality by damaging or destroying much of what has made America great over 2½ centuries—including the rule of law. The survival of our republic is at stake. But since I'm an economist, I'll stick to how MAGA policies are undermining America's economic greatness. Topping the list of what made our economy great is relatively free-market capitalism, supported by the rule of law. The U.S. has no monopoly on capitalism, but our version has traditionally been freer from regulation and taxed more lightly than, say, Europe's. Our sturdy rule of law has been a huge strength, attracting capital and brain power. The word 'relatively" does a lot of work, however. Every economy needs some regulation for health, safety, and other reasons. Every country needs to levy taxes to pay its bills. Democrats and Republicans have argued for decades over how much (and how) to regulate and tax, and those battles will continue long after MAGA is a bad memory. But when the White House begins telling companies like Walmart when it may raise prices, or Apple where it should make phones, that's not normal capitalism. America's economic greatness has also relied, among other things, on what might be called the federal-industrial-university complex in science and engineering. This engine of growth has been central to American economic exceptionalism. No other nation comes close. Yet each piece is now being undermined by MAGA. The U.S. government has been promoting scientific advances at least since Vannevar Bush, the engineer whose scientific leadership helped win World War II. He convinced President Harry S. Truman and Congress that such advances were crucial to national security and economic growth. Some of the research is done directly by the government in national laboratories such as Brookhaven and Los Alamos. Some is done at the National Institutes of Health. Some is done cooperatively between government and private companies, such as the life-saving mRNA vaccines for Covid-19. And a great deal is done at research universities, typically with federal grants. Importantly, the funding hasn't been politically based. Until now. Elon Musk's chainsaw approach has decimated or eliminated entire scientific units within the federal government. Green technology and anything that smacks of DEI are particular targets. But when you cut with a chainsaw rather than scissors, accidents happen. Remember those nuclear-safety employees? The national labs, the National Science Foundation and even the NIH are all looking at serious budget cuts nowadays. Will these make our nation greater? America's universities, the best in the world, merit special discussion because Mr. Trump has declared war on them, starting with Columbia and Harvard. First a small point: University education is an export industry for the U.S. In the president's distorted view of international trade, we are supposed to export more than we import. Well, the higher education industry does exactly that. Vastly more (paying) foreign students come here than American students go abroad. And it's not because our universities are cheaper. It's because they are better. But the main point is about science, and the extensive cooperation among research universities, government and private industry. America's universities employ many thousands of scientists, including some of the best. Will taking their grants away, sometimes in midproject, make our country greater? Our universities also teach many other subjects, some of which Mr. Trump doesn't like. Classroom discussions in these 'other" subjects may sometimes veer in anti-MAGA directions. That seems to upset the president. But should the federal government try to stop that by, for example, threatening to ruin the universities financially? The First Amendment has a clear answer: No. And so does any effort to keep America great. Universities are unusual 'businesses." While most aren't run for profit, they do need to pay their bills, including for research support. A few, like Harvard, are very wealthy. Most aren't. But even the richest universities are poorly positioned to withstand a major withdrawal of federal funds. Research and much else will suffer. Too few Americans, I fear, see the attack on universities as an attack on scientific and therefore economic progress. Maybe it's hard to generate sympathy for Harvard. But do we really want to make America mediocre again? Mr. Blinder is a professor of economics and public affairs at Princeton. He served as vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, 1994-96.
