27th Parliamentary-Intelligence Security Forum – Fighting Emerging Technology Threats – Crypto, AI and Quantum
Dr. Cosmin Vasile argued that the central question surrounding cryptocurrency is not whether it is innovative, but how regulated or unregulated the market truly is. He stressed that crypto represents both an economic opportunity and a threat. His core conclusion was that cryptocurrencies can only be regulated effectively through international public law instruments such as treaties and conventions. Only a coordinated global framework, he maintained, can create a mature, secure, and predictable market.
To support this view, he pointed to major market failures. The collapse of FTX involved roughly two million creditors across more than 80 jurisdictions, with billions of dollars in confirmed claims and massive tax liabilities. The downfall of Terra/Luna showed how rapid innovation can swiftly turn catastrophic, while the earlier failure of Mt. Gox exposed vulnerabilities in exchange security after hundreds of thousands of bitcoins were lost in a cyberattack. These cases demonstrated the paradox of an ecosystem once seen as secure precisely because it was largely unregulated.
He then examined state responses. Switzerland developed a structured blockchain framework balancing innovation and consumer protection. El Salvador adopted Bitcoin as legal tender, elevating its formal recognition. Dubai positioned itself as a global blockchain hub, and Singapore promoted crypto innovation through regulatory initiatives. At the regional level, the European Union introduced the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA), creating a unified regulatory regime within the EU, though limited in territorial scope and subject to exclusions.
Dr. Vasile emphasized that cryptocurrency raises interconnected financial, economic, anti-money laundering, security, consumer protection, and jurisdictional challenges. Because crypto transactions are inherently cross border, unilateral regulation produces fragmented and inconsistent outcomes. Drawing a parallel to global climate governance frameworks such as the Paris Agreement, he concluded that regulating cryptocurrencies at a purely national level is as unrealistic as tackling climate change without international cooperation. Only coordinated global conventions, he argued, can adequately address the full scope of the issue.
