Does Bitcoin's reserve threaten the dollar's dominance?
In a controversial move, US President Donald Trump issued a decision in March 2025 to create a 'digital gold reserve', represented by Bitcoin, to be funded by seized currencies through federal authorities, with the possibility of purchasing additional quantities from the open market later. The United States seeks to secure an early position as one of the largest holders of a rare and limited digital asset, in an attempt to keep pace with global financial transformations. However, this step, despite its strategic nature, raises profound questions about the future of the dollar itself.
A global shift in the balance of monetary reserves
The United States is not alone. Worldwide, calls are increasing for the adoption of Bitcoin as part of countries' official reserves:
Brazil proposes that Bitcoin represent 5% of the central bank's reserves.
Bhutan and El Salvador have already started storing Bitcoin as a strategic asset.
In Hong Kong and Switzerland, similar initiatives are being proposed.
As for China, it is believed to be quietly building a digital reserve away from the spotlight.
These moves not only express a trend towards diversification, but also indicate the beginning of a destabilization of the dollar's status as a dominant global reserve tool.
The American paradox strengthens Bitcoin and weakens the dollar
The adoption of Bitcoin as a reserve asset by the United States implies an acknowledgment of a direct competitor to the dollar. As countries increasingly rely on Bitcoin instead of the dollar, global demand for the American currency may decrease, leading to a decline in one of its most important advantages: 'exorbitant privilege' — the ability to borrow at little to no cost and print dollars without immediate inflationary pressures. The result? Washington may open the door to a global shift, which it may be the first to suffer from its consequences.
Trade escalation worsens the situation
Alongside monetary policies, the Trump administration is waging fierce trade wars
High tariffs were imposed on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China.
It threatens to impose additional restrictions on European exports, especially agricultural products.
But these policies rebound on the American economy itself; they lead to rising production costs, increasing prices, and escalating inflation rates — which diminishes the appeal of the dollar as a stable currency.
The 'Mar-a-Lago' Strategy: Attempting to Engineer a New Dominance
Trump sees the American market as a major leverage point, believing that countries will be forced to accept American terms to avoid losing this market. This is where the so-called 'Mar-a-Lago Strategy' originates — a policy based on imposing tariffs and forcing partners to devalue their currencies against the dollar, aiming to reduce the cost of American debt and stimulate domestic industry, without undermining the international status of the dollar. However, this strategy is fundamentally different from historical agreements such as 'Plaza' or 'Louvre', which relied on international coordination. Trump's strategy is characterized by unilateralism and pressure, not cooperation.
But what if others do not respond?
All these policies are based on a key assumption: that other countries will not risk losing the American market. But if these countries decide to turn towards alternative reserves, or reduce their reliance on the dollar, or build independent trade and monetary alliances, the entire scheme may collapse. Instead of reinforcing dominance, the United States may be inadvertently paving the way for a historic shift in the global financial system, where decentralized currencies like Bitcoin are in a position of power.
Summary
In its quest to maintain monetary dominance, America may be treading a path that leads to its dismantling. The combination of embracing digital assets and pursuing aggressive trade policies may yield a result completely opposite to what is intended: the end of dollar supremacy, not its consolidation.
Could the decisions of the great powers be the very spark that ignites the global system they created? And how do we distinguish between maintaining dominance and inadvertently nurturing its opposite?