Former Pentagon chief: The Clarity Act is a matter of national security, not just regulation.
Mark Esper, who served as U.S. Secretary of Defense, has made a sharp statement urging the Senate to immediately pass the Clarity Act. In his analytical article, he emphasizes that the bill, which defines the structure of the digital assets market, goes far beyond financial regulation and directly affects America's strategic interests.
Esper argues that over the past eight decades, U.S. global dominance has been built not only on military power but also on control over the dollar and the global payment infrastructure. It is these levers that give Washington the ability to impose sanctions and oversee global financial flows. The emergence of new blockchain infrastructure and dollar-pegged stablecoins, in his view, could radically redistribute the balance of power. If the United States does not set the rules of the game, other nations will.
Esper names China as the main geopolitical adversary. Beijing, he claims, is actively developing state-controlled payment systems, seeking to reduce dependence on American oversight and undermine the dollar's hegemony. In this context, the Clarity Act should be viewed not as an ordinary financial services law but as a critically important measure in the realm of national security.
The former official, who now sits on Coinbase's global advisory council, pays special attention to the so-called "regulatory vacuum" in the United States. He stresses that the current uncertainty is not just slowing market development but actively pushing companies, capital, and technological influence into foreign jurisdictions. Passing the Clarity Act, in his logic, would bring this activity back into the U.S. regulatory fold, extending Bank Secrecy Act requirements regarding AML/KYC procedures to exchanges, brokers, and dealers.
Esper also highlights the expansion of the U.S. Treasury Department's powers over digital assets through Section 311 of the USA Patriot Act. This, he says, would strengthen the sanctions toolkit and allow for more effective pressure on North Korea, criminal syndicates, and other regimes under sanctions.
In concluding his column, he raises the issue of economic competition, noting that U.S. leadership directly depends on whether developers and innovative companies remain within the American jurisdiction. Recall that on August 6, the Senate postponed the procedural vote on the Clarity Act, moving its consideration to mid-September.
My comment: Esper's arguments reflect a growing awareness in U.S. political circles that cryptocurrencies are not just a speculative asset but a tool of geopolitical influence. However, linking market regulation to national security is a double-edged sword: it could either accelerate the law's passage or lead to overly strict control that stifles innovation in its infancy. The prolonged process only exacerbates the uncertainty that today is the main enemy of the American crypto industry.