Digital Currencies Could Mitigate the Shocks of Trump's Trade War
The resurgence of economic nationalism and protectionist trade policies since U.S. President Donald Trump's return to the White House, particularly through the escalation and now de-escalation of tariffs against China and other key trade partners, has already triggered significant disruptions in global trade flows, with the potential for more in store. These measures, ostensibly aimed at correcting trade imbalances, led instead to retaliatory tariffs, volatility in global markets and a possible decline in cross-border investment. As supply chains fractured and industrial output slowed down, many economies faced the risk of recessionary pressures, revealing the fragility of global economic interdependence under political stress.
Amid these structural tensions, digital assets—most notably Central Bank Digital Currencies, or CBDCs, and stablecoins—have emerged as potential instruments of monetary and financial innovation that could help address some of the disruption caused by Trump's tariffs and other systemic shocks to the global economy.
In this context, it is crucial to differentiate among the various digital financial instruments currently under consideration. CBDCs are digitally native, sovereign-issued representations of a nation's fiat currency. Directly managed by central banks, they are designed to be legal tender, promising enhanced monetary sovereignty, greater financial inclusion and increased transaction transparency within a regulated framework. So far, three countries—Nigeria, the Bahamas and Jamaica—have launched CBDCs, while dozens of others, including China, Europe, India and Brazil, are in the process of piloting them.
On the other hand, stablecoins in their current iteration are privately issued digital tokens engineered to maintain a stable value by being pegged to fiat currencies or tangible commodities. They aim to integrate the stability of traditional currencies with the efficiencies of decentralized or hybrid financial architectures.
To get more in-depth news and expert analysis on global affairs from WPR, sign up for our free Daily Review newsletter.
Unlike speculative cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, both CBDCs and stablecoins are fundamentally designed to optimize payment efficiency and facilitate deeper integration within the broader financial system. The key technological differentiator lies in their programmable features and capacity for real-time data integration. This allows for conditional transactions such as targeted subsidies or capital controls, as well as rapid deployment of relief measures and enhanced systemic oversight—capabilities that become particularly relevant in an era of fractured global trade and recurring economic shocks.
Though initially conceived as enhancements to payment systems and financial inclusion, these digital forms of money have the capacity to address broader macroeconomic challenges, including the stabilization of economies during externally induced downturns.
The imposition of tariffs by the U.S. under the Trump administration, particularly against China, marked a pronounced shift away from multilateral trade norms. Although the ramifications of these tariffs are yet to be fully determined, it can be assumed that the world will not merely witness a slowdown in bilateral trade between the U.S. and China, but a broader disruption of global supply chains, with ripple effects across both advanced and emerging economies.
Trade wars of this magnitude have historically triggered contractionary effects: depressed export volumes, reduced industrial output and heightened input costs. Faced with uncertainty and fluctuating trade terms, businesses often defer investment decisions, amplifying economic stagnation. Simultaneously, market volatility and currency depreciation, particularly in trade-exposed economies, can lead to capital flight and financial instability.
The economic consequences of these disruptions are often recessionary in nature. However, traditional monetary and fiscal responses are not always agile or evenly effective in this context, especially in economies with limited policy space. This challenge explains the growing interest in alternative instruments, including digital assets, to buffer against such externally induced shocks.
Digital assets have grown in prominence as governments and private actors seek to modernize payment infrastructures and increase financial inclusion. However, their potential extends beyond transactional efficiency. Their programmable features and capacity for real-time data integration offer possibilities for more targeted monetary interventions, including during times of economic distress. This functional flexibility adds a useful tool to policymakers' kit in efforts toward macroeconomic stabilization, particularly in crisis scenarios shaped by trade and financial dislocations.
In recessionary environments precipitated by trade wars, digital assets offer several novel mechanisms for economic stabilization. First, CBDCs provide a direct and programmable channel for monetary stimulus. Governments could deploy targeted transfers to households or businesses without relying on intermediaries, thereby accelerating the impact of monetary policy and enhancing its precision. This approach could prove especially effective in periods of constrained demand and institutional bottlenecks.
Second, both CBDCs and stablecoins can reduce friction in cross-border transactions. Trade tensions often exacerbate currency volatility and disrupt international settlements. Because they are pegged to low-volatility assets, stablecoins may serve as interim units of account or stores of value in jurisdictions facing capital flight or depreciating domestic currencies. CBDCs with cross-border interoperability features could facilitate bilateral or regional trade outside traditional dollar-based systems, thereby insulating economies from external financial pressures.
Third, the data-rich nature of digital asset platforms offers real-time economic insights, enabling more responsive and adaptive policy interventions. Together, these capabilities suggest that digital assets could serve as complementary instruments within broader countercyclical economic strategies.
Yet, despite their potential, the deployment of digital assets as macroeconomic tools is fraught with structural, regulatory and geopolitical limitations. Most centrally, institutional readiness varies significantly across jurisdictions. Implementing a secure, scalable and resilient CBDC infrastructure demands not only technological capacity but also robust legal and regulatory frameworks—many of which remain underdeveloped.
Though stablecoins are more rapidly deployable, the fact that they are issued by private-sector nonstate actors raises concerns about monetary sovereignty and regulatory arbitrage. Their proliferation could undermine capital controls and erode central banks' ability to conduct effective monetary policy, particularly in emerging markets. Additionally, the absence of standardized global oversight increases the risk of financial fragmentation and illicit financial flows.
Geopolitically, the asymmetric adoption of digital currencies could deepen global financial imbalances. If major powers develop CBDCs with extraterritorial reach, smaller economies may face new forms of dependency or exclusion. Finally, unresolved issues around privacy, surveillance and cybersecurity continue to represent challenges, undermining public trust and long-term scalability. These risks underscore the necessity of cautious, coordinated implementation strategies, at a time when multilateral cooperation is being strained, not least by the Trump administration's trade war.
CBDCs and stablecoins hold promise as supplementary instruments for mitigating the economic fallout of trade war-induced recessions. Their programmable design, transaction efficiency and potential for policy precision offer meaningful advantages in crisis contexts where traditional tools may falter. However, issues such as technological infrastructure gaps, privacy concerns, cross-border friction and uneven regulatory readiness continue to impede their widespread deployment.
For the advantages offered by digital assets to be fully realized, these significant limitations around adoption, interoperability and regulatory clarity must first be addressed. As digital assets continue to evolve, their strategic utility will hinge on careful governance, institutional capacity building and multilateral coordination to ensure they support, rather than destabilize, an increasingly fragile global economic order.
S. Yash Kalash is research director of digital economy at the Centre for International Governance Innovation.
The post Digital Currencies Could Mitigate the Shocks of Trump's Trade War appeared first on World Politics Review.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

CNN
19 minutes ago
- CNN
In pictures: Burning cars and tear gas in LA protests
Protests in Los Angeles escalated on Sunday after President Donald Trump deployed 2,000 National Guard members to the area, a move that Democratic leaders called unnecessary and inflammatory. The protests against recent immigration raids began Friday, but picked up in scale and intensity over the weekend. CNN reporters on the ground witnessed officers striking and pushing protesters, and deploying tear gas into the crowd. Meanwhile, the protests caused major disruptions on the 101 Freeway, a main artery connecting major Californian cities. Photos and videos on the ground showed cars being set on fire and protesters throwing objects onto police vehicles.
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Downtown LA is a scene of pandemonium and lawlessness
A shirtless man waving a Mexican flag stands atop a burning car in the heart of Los Angeles, as another man throws a traffic cone into the flames and some play drums and shout chants in opposition to immigration officials. In the background, city hall can be glimpsed through a haze of thick black smoke. The downtown district of one of America's biggest cities was a scene of pandemonium and lawlessness as protests, which had previously been mainly peaceful, turned ugly. Critics of Donald Trump said the president's extraordinary decision to deploy National Guard troops, defying the wishes of the state's governor, had inflamed tensions and stoked emotions. The 101 Freeway, the main highway cutting through the downtown area, was also closed down for much of the day as police and protesters faced off, with flash bang devices sending some people scattering. Bottles and other projectiles were hurled towards police, who responded by using tear gas and rubber bullets. It was this chaos, his critics say, that Donald Trump wanted to provoke. Trump's decision to call in 2,000 National Guard troops, several hundred of whom were on the streets of LA on Sunday, was taken without consultation with the California governor and LA mayor, and marked an extraordinary escalation by the president. The military arrived on Sunday morning and was ordered to guard federal buildings, after two days of protest against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers. As part of Trump's closed border policy, ICE has been ordered to find, detain and deport as many illegal immigrants as possible, and it was these raids that stoked the first signs of protest on Friday into the weekend. By midday Sunday, the military was surrounded by protesters outside the Metropolitan Detention Centre in downtown LA. It was here that many immigrants had been held before being shipped off to detention facilities. The walls and floors are covered in expletive-ridden graffiti, reading f*** ICE. The Los Angeles police soon split the crowd and drove a wedge between the National Guard and the crowd. California Governor Gavin Newsom has called Donald Trump's acts those of a "dictator, not a president". He's formally requested that the Trump administration withdraw the National Guard. The White House say the military will remain there until order is restored. Five hundred marines are still on standby. Los Angeles Police Department police chief Jim McDonnell, asked whether the National Guard was needed, said: "This thing has gotten out of control." He said that although the LAPD would not initially have requested assistance from the National Guard, the disorder had caused him to reevaluate his assessment. Several people were arrested. Sky News witnessed a young woman, who called herself Gabriella, riding her motorbike at speed towards a line of police officers. Read more from Sky News:Analysis: Trump deploys federal force in LATrump claims CA officials 'can't do their jobs' One of the police officers used his arm to push her off the bike. She said she was protesting because her "people were being rounded up." Politicians on both sides of the aisle condemned the violence, but some vehemently disagreed about what actions led to the escalation.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Insurrection Act not off the table for LA protests, Trump says
The Brief Speaking to reporters Sunday, Trump did not rule out invoking the Insurrection Act in response to the Los Angeles ICE protests. "We're not going to let them get away with it. We're going to have troops everywhere," Trump said. President Donald Trump said he won't rule out invoking the Insurrection Act as violent protests against federal immigration officers continue in Los Angeles for a third day. National Guard troops clashed with protesters Sunday, firing tear gas at crowds as protesters moved onto the freeways surrounding downtown and blocked traffic. Police said two LAPD officers were injured after they were hit by motorcyclists who tried to breach a skirmish line. Trump deployed hundreds of National Guard troops to California after confrontations between federal immigration officers and protesters who tried to stop them from carrying out immigration sweeps. THE LATEST: LA ICE protests, Day 3: National Guard arrives, as directed by Trump The backstory The Insurrection Act allows presidents to call on reserve or active-duty military units to respond to unrest in the states, an authority that is not reviewable by the courts. One of its few guardrails requires the president to request that the participants disperse. Congress passed the act in 1792, just four years after the Constitution was ratified. Joseph Nunn, a national security expert with the Brennan Center for Justice, told The Associated Press it's an amalgamation of different statutes enacted between then and the 1870s, a time when there was little in the way of local law enforcement. "It is a law that in many ways was created for a country that doesn't exist anymore," he added. READ MORE: Torrance 9-year-old detained by ICE faces potential deportation to Honduras It also is one of the most substantial exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally prohibits using the military for law enforcement purposes. What they're saying Speaking to reporters Sunday, Trump did not rule out invoking the Insurrection Act in response to the Los Angeles ICE protests. "Depends on whether or not there's an insurrection," Trump said. "We're not going to let them get away with it. We're going to have troops everywhere, we're not going to let this happen to our country. We're not going to let our country be torn apart." Trump said he did not believe the protests constituted an insurrection as of Sunday afternoon, but he said, "you have violent people, and we're not going to let them get away with that." Dig deeper Presidents have issued a total of 40 proclamations invoking the law, some of those done multiple times for the same crisis, Nunn said. Lyndon Johnson invoked it three times — in Baltimore, Chicago and Washington — in response to the unrest in cities after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968. During the Civil Rights era, Presidents Johnson, John F. Kennedy and Dwight Eisenhower used the law to protect activists and students desegregating schools. Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock, Arkansas, to protect Black students integrating Central High School after that state's governor activated the National Guard to keep the students out. George H.W. Bush was the last president to use the Insurrection Act, a response to riots in Los Angeles in 1992 after the acquittal of the white police officers who beat Black motorist Rodney King in an incident that was videotaped. The Source This report includes information from President Donald Trump's comments to reporters Sunday and previous reporting from FOX TV Stations. FOX's Catherine Stoddard contributed.