Bitcoin Declared a Matter of U.S. National Security, Says Deputy CIA Director
CIA’s Growing Involvement in Bitcoin Signals Shift From Cypherpunk Roots to Strategic Asset
Bitcoin is no longer just a financial asset — it’s a matter of national security, according to Michael Ellis, Deputy Director of the CIA. Speaking on The Pomp Podcast with market analyst Anthony Pompliano, Ellis confirmed that the agency is actively integrating Bitcoin into its intelligence and counter-intelligence operations, working closely with law enforcement to track BTC transactions.
“Bitcoin is here to stay — cryptocurrency is here to stay,” Ellis said, underlining the government’s long-term view of digital assets.
“We need to ensure the United States is well-positioned against China and other adversaries.”
This marks a strategic pivot in how top U.S. intelligence officials approach Bitcoin — no longer as a fringe technology, but as a tool of geopolitical influence.
Bitcoin’s Institutionalization Raises Tensions in the Crypto Community
While Ellis celebrated the mainstream adoption of cryptocurrency, his comments triggered concern among longtime Bitcoin advocates and cypherpunks, who view crypto as a weapon against centralized power — not as an extension of it.
The CIA’s increasing role in Bitcoin surveillance and strategic deployment comes at a time when government involvement is intensifying across the board.
In a parallel development, President Donald Trump signed an executive order on March 7 establishing a “Bitcoin Strategic Reserve,” sparking mixed reactions.
-
Bitcoin Magazine CEO David Bailey welcomed the move.
-
Erik Voorhees, founder of Venice AI, criticized the idea of government ownership of Bitcoin but conceded that if any crypto is to be adopted at the state level, “it should be Bitcoin only.”
From Crypto Idealism to State Asset Class
The transformation of Bitcoin from a peer-to-peer digital cash system to a state-governed strategic asset has been unfolding quietly over years. In 2020, Therese Chambers, then at the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), warned that cryptocurrencies were behaving more like traditional financial instruments and less like privacy tools.
This financialization and institutional capture of crypto raise existential questions:
-
Can Bitcoin still be a tool for financial sovereignty?
-
Or is it becoming just another cog in the machinery of global finance?
The Global Stage: Bitcoin vs. China and Beyond
Ellis’ comments echo a broader narrative of technological competition with China, where digital yuan initiatives have already gained traction.
The implication is clear: If Bitcoin is the financial infrastructure of the future, the U.S. wants to control it — or at least not fall behind
