Second, Crypto generally cannot be used to directly purchase materiel or refugee supplies because Crypto often must be converted into another currency first. It is unclear whether another, less Crypto-familiar nation would experience the same benefits from Crypto donations, or benefit to the same degree as Ukraine has from Crypto donations. As reported by the New York Times, Ukraine was a Crypto pioneer in the years prior to the invasion, and the average Ukrainian citizen has more familiarity with-and therefore, greater ability to use-Crypto funds and donations than citizens from perhaps any other nation. First, Ukraine is uniquely well-suited to use Crypto as an alternative to traditional finance. Nevertheless, pro-Crypto arguments overlook unique factors enhancing Crypto’s suitability in Ukraine, among other weaknesses regarding Crypto’s value more generally. Pro-Crypto proponents consistently stress that Crypto offers substantial relief for day-to-day citizens of both nations by providing a more stable and accessible, and less burdensome means of covering expenses than physical cash, all while providing aid where aid is most needed. As of March 12, 2022, “ore than $63 million in Crypto assets ha been donated to the Ukrainian government and an NGO providing support to the military, according to blockchain analytics firm Elliptic.” (Hannah Miller, Bloomberg). Another key point in Crypto’s favor is that it enables efficient, high-volume donations to the Ukrainian people and government. Id. These benefits go for Ukrainian and Russian citizens-numerous Crypto exchanges are declining universal trading bans on Russians, reasoning that Russian citizens may not support the invasion and may need Crypto due to the ruble’s dramatic devaluation. Crypto is also a more reliable store of value than either nation’s currency as each currency experiences rapid devaluation amid overstressed demand. As a non-tangible asset, Crypto is more accessible, less dangerous, and less burdensome than physical cash in a combat zone. “Pro-Crypto” proponents repeatedly espouse Crypto’s value as a digital tool for common citizens on both sides of the conflict. (Emily Stewart and Rebecca Heilweil, Vox). The other side maintains that Crypto is a viable tool for the Russian state and Russian oligarchs to avoid economic sanctions and launder funds. One side argues that Crypto provides financial support and stability for Ukraine’s citizens and government (as well as for average Russians). Buterin’s statement was made in the context of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and illustrates a new, fundamental truth: Crypto cannot remain neutral and apolitical in the future.Ĭrypto has sparked two views of its role in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. For example, consider the statement of Vitalik Buterin, Ethereum’s co-founder: “Ethereum is neutral, but I am not.” (Lionel Laurent, Bloomberg).
![cnet encrypto cnet encrypto](https://software.thaiware.com/upload_misc/software/2017_08/images/13339_17080911271435.jpg)
Though Bitcoin and other Cryptos remain apolitical tools, the intersection of theory with harsh reality has led to Crypto’s increasing politicization. Cryptocurrencies (“Crypto”) are meant to exist in a neutral haven: Satoshi Nakamoto expressly designed Bitcoin to allow peer-to-peer interactions outside of existing regulatory and political frameworks.