For several years, I wondered whether General Ibrahim Babangida would go to his grave without writing his memoir. He played such epochal roles in Nigeria’s history that he would have done a great disservice to this country had he died without writing his biography and documenting those seismic roles. So, you will understand why I was excited when General Babangida recently published his memoir, and why I have read the entire 420-page book. 

Whatever anyone may say about the memoir, titled A Journey in Service: An Autobiography, the truth is that General Babangida has enriched Nigerian history by making significant contributions to the body of knowledge about Nigeria’s historical evolution. Babangida truly deserves kudos for not going to his grave with the rich narratives, disputed or not, that he provides in the book. Warts and all, Babangida’s memoir is a collector’s item. 

The issues General Babangida covers in the book are so significant that one can’t discuss them in one column. So, I’ll focus here on his take on the chain of events that led to the Nigerian Civil War, a monumentally devastating war that claimed the lives of nearly 100,000 combatants; took the lives of over two million civilians, with about five million people displaced; and, of course, left indelible scars on Nigeria’s psyche and internal wounds on its conscience. Inevitably, the question is: Was the war avoidable? 

To answer to that question, one must start with Babangida’s take on whether the January 15, 1966 coup was an “Igbo” coup. This is important because if it was an “Igbo” coup, then history must record that the coup took the genie out of the bottle and led inexorably to the civil war. However, if it was not an “Igbo” coup, then the blame for the devastating war lies somewhere else. General Babangida argued both sides. Unfortunately, that equivocation gave ammunitions to some people to push their preferred narrative. For instance, social media was awash with uncontrolled elation by those who claimed Babangida said the January 15 coup “was not” an “Igbo” coup. Yet, there are people like Femi Fani-Kayode who assert that Babangida called the coup an “Igbo” coup. Fani-Kayode tweeted: “The truth is that the January 15th 1966 coup WAS an Igbo one and I am glad to say that IBB has confirmed it.” He added: “The coup was an ethnic one and that ethnicity were the Igbos.”

But Babangida did not say categorically that it was an “Igbo” coup. True, he said on page 39 that the handling of the coup gave it “an unmistakeably ethnic coloration”, especially with the “heinously callous” murder of Sir Ahmadu Bello and his wife, Hafsatu, “compounded by the fact that there were no related coup activities in the Eastern region.” However, Babangida also said earlier on the same page: “Ethnic sentiments did not drive the original objective of the coup plotters.” For evidence, he cited the following facts:  a) the coup plotters had wanted to release Chief Obafemi Awolowo, a Yoruba, from prison and make him “the executive provisional President of Nigeria”, which would be strange if the coup was Igbo-centric; b) some non-Igbo officers, such as Major Adewale Ademoyega, a Yoruba, took part in the coup; c) some senior officers of Igbo extraction were also victims of the coup; and d) it was an Igbo officer, Major John Obiena, who crushed the coup. Babangida concluded by saying: “I admit that my position here may be the naïve insights of an unsuspecting young officer who viewed events from a distance!” 

In truth, the “ethnic colouration” was one of perception than reality. A professional psychoanalysis of the coup plotters would probably show that they were idealistic young officers who were fed up with the status quo in Nigeria and genuinely wanted to bring about a change and were not motivated by ethnicity. Most educated young officers in those days were ideological. They probably shared Chief Awolowo’s welfarist ideology and were impressed with how he governed Western Region and wanted him to govern Nigeria. But Awolowo later made it clear that he would not have agreed to be a military-imposed leader of Nigeria. Unfortunately, in the aftermath of the January 15 coup, no Northerner was willing to contemplate that the coup was not ethnic, not Igbo!

General Babangida went to great lengths to describe, with impressive details, the pressure that Northern officers faced from the Northern politicians, and even the Northern populace, to retaliate against the January 15 killings. The officers were publicly ridiculed, called “big fools and cowards” and even reportedly denied “conjugal benefits” by their wives! Their response was brutal. On July 28, 1966, at Abeokuta Garrison, junior Northern officers killed several Igbo officers. The next day, on July 29, the actual countercoup took place as Northern officers killed the head of state, General Johnson Thomas Aguiyi-Ironsi, and the military governor of Western Region, Lt-Col. Adekunle Fajuyi, among others. 

But here’s the point. The conventional wisdom says that the January 15 coup and the July 29 countercoup led to the civil war. Yet, that’s not exactly true. Lt-Col. Emeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu, the governor of Eastern Nigeria, did not declare secession because Aguiyi-Ironsi, an Igbo, was killed. In fact, Ojukwu moved on from Aguiyi-Ironsi’s assassination when he said that Brigadier Babafemi Ogundipe, the most senior Army officer, should succeed him as head of state. That was not the mindset of someone who wanted to secede. But here’s the truth: the North wanted a revenge so badly and had it in the Abeokuta killings of Igbo officers and in the July 29 countercoup. Yet, that did not appease them. Why?

General Babangida described in gory details the events between May 29 and September 29, 1966, when, according to Official Army Records, more than 213 predominantly Igbo officers and other ranks were killed. In what was described as a “pogrom”, over 30,000 Igbos were massacred and several thousand wounded in the North, while some 50,000 Igbos were forced to flee Northern Nigeria for the East by the end of July 1966. Babangida blamed General Yakubu Gowon, then head of state, for failing to protect the Igbos in the North, adding: “Faced with this intolerable situation, Ojukwu, understandably”, felt Igbos were unsafe in Nigeria. That triggered the secession and the war!

True, the 1966 coup and countercoup were dreadful. But those events were not the proximate cause of the civil war. It was the then Northern politicians’ insatiable braying for revenge against the Igbos, and Gowon’s failure to protect them in the North, that triggered the pogrom, the secession and the war. Those are the great insights from Babangida’s memoir! 

Rema, Mercy Chinwo, D’banj, and Ayra Starr were among the Nigerians who won big at the 2025 Trace Awards.

Rema took home two prestigious awards ‘Album of the Year’ for ‘Heis’ and ‘Best Male Artist’ while Ayra Starr was crowned the ‘Best West African Artist’.

Chinwo won the ‘Best Gospel Artist’ award for her soulful and uplifting music while D’banj secured the ‘Lifetime Achievement Award’.

Other notable Nigerian winners include P.priime who won the ‘Best Producer’ category for ‘MMS’ while Meji Alabi claimed the ‘Best Music Video’ award for Rema’s ‘DND’.

This year’s edition of Trace Awards took place at the Mora Resort in Zanzibar, Tanzania on Wednesday, February 26.

Below is the full list of winners (in bold):

Global Awards

Song of the Year

• Titom & Yuppe – ‘Tshwala Bam’ (South Africa)
• Tyla – ‘Jump’ (South Africa)
• Tyler ICU – ‘Mnike’ (South Africa)
• Tamsir x Team Paiya – ‘Coup du Marteau’ (Ivory Coast)
• Asake & Travis Scott – ‘Active’ (Nigeria)
• Tems – ‘Love Me Jeje’ (Nigeria)
• Burna Boy – ‘Higher’ (Nigeria)
• Rema & Shallipopi – ‘Benin Boys’ (Nigeria)
• Diamond Platnumz – ‘Komasawa’ (Tanzania)

Album of the Year

• Rema – Heis (Nigeria)
• Burna Boy – I Told Them (Nigeria)
• Asake – Lungu Boy (Nigeria)
• Josey – Vibration Universelle (Ivory Coast)
• Amaarae – Fountain Baby (Ghana)
• King Promise – True To Self (Ghana)
• Stonebwoy – 5th Dimension (Ghana)
• Toofan – Stamina (Togo)

Best Collaboration

• Tamsir & Team Paiya – ‘Coup du Marteau’ (Ivory Coast)
• Titom & Yuppe & Burna Boy – ‘Tshwala Bam’ (Remix) (South Africa/Nigeria)
• Neyna & MC Acondize – ‘Nu Ka Sta Para’ (Cape Verde)
• Kocee ft. Patoranking – ‘Credit Alert’ (Cameroon/Nigeria)
• Asake & Wizkid – ‘MMS’ (Nigeria)
• Rema & Shallipopi – ‘Benin Boys’ (Nigeria)
• Odumodublvck & Black Sherif – ‘Woto Woto Seasoning’ (Ghana)

Best Music Video

• Meji Alabi – Rema ‘DND’ (Nigeria)
• TG Omori – Kizz Daniel & Davido ‘Twe Twe’ (Nigeria)
• Director Folex – Zuchu feat Innoss’ B ‘Nani’ (Remix) (Tanzania/DRC)
• Nabil Elderkin – Tyla ‘Jump’ (South Africa)
• Kmane – Ayra Starr ‘Commas’ (Nigeria)
• Seoute Emmanuel – Toofan ‘C Pas Normal’ (Togo)
• Ach’B – Innoss’ B ‘Sete’ (DRC)
• Edgar Esteves – Asake & Wizkid ‘MMS’ (Nigeria)

Best Dancer

• Makhadzi (South Africa)
• Ikorodu Boys (Nigeria)
• Dancegod Lloyd (Ghana)
• Incredible Zigi (Ghana)
• Kamo Mphela (South Africa)
• Telminho (Angola)
• Ordinateur (Ivory Coast)
• Issac Kalonji (Democratic Republic of Congo)

Best DJ

• DJ Moh Green – ‘Kelele’ (Algeria)
• Tyler ICU – ‘Mnike’ (South Africa)
• Uncle Waffles – ‘Wadibusa’ (South Africa)
• DJ Tunez – ‘Apala Disco Remix’ (Nigeria)
• DJ Nelasta – ‘Eros’ (Angola)
• DJ Spinall ft. Tyla & Omah Lay – ‘One Call’ (Nigeria)
• DJ Neptune ft. Qing Madi – ‘Honest’ (Nigeria)
• DJ Maphorisa – ‘Mnike’ (South Africa)
• Kabza De Small – ‘Imithandazo’ (South Africa)

Best Hip Hop Artist (sponsored by Hot 97)

• Didi B (Ivory Coast)
• Nasty C (South Africa)
• Odumodublvck (Nigeria)
• Suspect 95 (Ivory Coast)
• Sarkodie (Ghana)
• Young Lunya (Tanzania)
• Maglera Doe Boy (South Africa)

Pan-African Awards

Best Global African Artist

• Diamond Platnumz (Tanzania)
• Tyla (South Africa)
• Tyler ICU (South Africa)
• Fally Ipupa (Democratic Republic of Congo)
• Burna Boy (Nigeria)
• Asake (Nigeria/USA)
• Rema (Nigeria)
• Ayra Starr (Nigeria)

Best Male Artist

• Rema (Nigeria)
• Dlala Thukzin (South Africa)
• Fally Ipupa (Democratic Republic of Congo)
• Diamond Platnumz (Tanzania)
• Asake (Nigeria)
• Burna Boy (Nigeria)
• Wizkid (Nigeria)
• Stonebwoy (Ghana)

Best Female Artist

• Tyla (South Africa)
• Makhadzi (South Africa)
• Chelsea Dinorath (Angola)
• Josey (Ivory Coast)
• Ayra Starr (Nigeria)
• Tems (Nigeria)
• Yemi Alade (Nigeria)

Best Live Performance

• Fally Ipupa (DRC)
• Ayra Starr – 21: The World Tour (Nigeria)
• Burna Boy – I Told Them (Nigeria)
• Tyla (South Africa)
• Yemi Alade – African Rebel Tour (Nigeria)
• Didi B – Mojo Trone Tour (Ivory Coast)
• Diamond Platnumz – Wasafi Festival (Tanzania)

Best Producer

• P.Priime – ‘MMS’ (Nigeria)
• Kelvin Momo – ‘Sewe’ (South Africa)
• DJ Maphorisa – ‘Mnike’ (South Africa)
• Tam Sir – ‘Coup du Marteau’ (Ivory Coast)
• Sarz – ‘Happiness’ (Nigeria)
• Jae 5 – ‘Perfect Combi’ (Ghana)
• KDDO – ‘For Certain’ (Party Next Door) (Nigeria)
• London – ‘Ozeba’ (Nigeria)
• Kabza De Small – ‘Imithandazo’ (South Africa)

Best Gospel Artist

• Mercy Chinwo (Nigeria)
• Spirit of Praise 10 (South Africa)
• KS Bloom (Ivory Coast)
• Ada Ehi (Nigeria)
• Bella Kombo (Tanzania)
• Israël Mbonyi (Rwanda)

Regional Awards

Best Artist Eastern Africa

• Bien (Kenya)
• Diamond Platnumz (Tanzania)
• Joshua Baraka (Uganda)
• Harmonize (Tanzania)
• Rophnan (Ethiopia)
• Marioo (Tanzania)
• Zuchu (Tanzania)
• Nandy (Tanzania)

Best Artist (Western Africa Anglophone)

• Ayra Starr (Nigeria)
• Seyi Vibez (Nigeria)
• Adekunle Gold (Nigeria)
• Tems (Nigeria)
• Chike (Nigeria)
• Simi (Nigeria)
• KiDi (Ghana)

Best Artist (Southern Africa)

• Tyler ICU (South Africa)
• Titom & Yuppe (South Africa)
• De Mthuda (South Africa)
• Inkabi Zezwe (South Africa)
• Dlala Thukzin (South Africa)
• Tyla (South Africa)
• Uncle Waffles (South Africa)

Best Artist Francophone Africa

• Josey (Ivory Coast)
• Didi B (Ivory Coast)
• Tidiane Mario (Congo)
• Gaz Mawete (Democratic Republic of Congo)
• Wally B. Seck (Senegal)
• PhillBill (Cameroon)

Best Artist (Lusophone Africa)

• Chelsea Dinorath (Angola)
• Calema (São Tomé and Príncipe)
• Landrick (Angola)
• Twenty Fingers (Mozambique)
• Mr. Bow (Mozambique)
• Soraia Ramos (Cape Verde)

Best Artist (Tanzania)

• Nandy (Tanzania)
• Mbosso (Zanzibar)
• Diamond Platnumz (Tanzania)
• Zuchu (Zanzibar)
• Marioo (Tanzania)
• Alikiba (Tanzania)
• Jux (Tanzania)
• Harmonize (Tanzania)

International and Diaspora Awards

Best Artist (Europe)

• Joe Dwet File (France/Haiti)
• Central Cee (United Kingdom)
• Kalash (France/Martinique)
• Darkoo (United Kingdom)
• Jungeli (France)
• Franglish (France)
• Aya Nakamura (France/Mali)

Best Artist (Brazil)

• Duquesa (Brazil)
• Racionais MC’s (Brazil)
• MC IG (Brazil)
• Péricles (Brazil)
• Tasha & Tracie (Brazil)
• Ludmilla (Brazil)

Best Artist (Caribbean)

• Lea Churro (Reunion Island)
• Venssy (French Guiana)
• Mathieu White (Guadeloupe)
• Meryl (Martinique)
• Nesly (French Guiana)
• Shenseea (Jamaica)
• Kenny Haiti (Haiti)

Best Artist (Indian Ocean)

• Barth (Reunion)
• Goulam (Comoros)
• PLL (Reunion)
• Kalipsxau (Reunion)
• Léa Churros (Reunion)
• Jamily Jeanne (Mauritius)

Lifetime Achievement Award

• D’Banj

[TheCable]

The quick laundering of over $400 million from Bybit’s hack suggests North Korea may have expanded its operations, analysts say.

Over $400 million from Bybit‘s $1.46 billion incident was laundered in just days, with analysts at blockchain forensic firm TRM Labs now raising serious concerns that North Korea may have expanded its laundering operations.

In a Feb. 27 blog post, the analysts pointed out that Bybit’s attackers moved nearly half a billion in less than a week, using intermediary wallets, crypto swaps, decentralized exchanges, and cross-chain bridges to hide the trail.

“This rapid laundering suggests that North Korea has either expanded its money laundering infrastructure or that underground financial networks, particularly in China, have enhanced their capacity to absorb and process illicit funds.”

TRM Labs

The analysts note that North Korean hackers typically use crypto mixers to hide stolen funds before cashing out. But the scale of the Bybit incident has forced them to adopt new methods. Instead of mixers, they are now using multiple wallets and decentralized platforms to obscure the money trail.

Initially, some stolen Ethereum was sent through BNB Chain and Solana. Now, most of it has been sent to the Bitcoin network. Despite the quick laundering, much of the Bitcoin remains untouched, suggesting the attackers are preparing for large-scale liquidation through OTC networks, the analysts suggest.

Bybit lost $1.46 billion in a multi-stage attack, which security experts link to Safe Wallet. The attackers reportedly compromised a Safe{Wallet} developer’s device, tricking Bybit’s Safe wallet owner into signing a malicious transaction.

[Crypto News]

2025 is the year when Bitcoin BTC-1.88%Bitcoin will reach its turning point. Historically regarded as a “store of value,” its role in decentralized finance has been minimal, capturing only close to 0.3% of its market cap compared to Ethereum ETH-3.91%Ethereum dominant position. Ethereum’s programmability has made it the natural home for DeFi, but Bitcoin’s $2 trillion market cap and unmatched security present an untapped opportunity ripe for investment and success.

Key advancements, including BitVM, a proposed system that allows complex computations and smart contracts to be executed on the Bitcoin blockchain, and Bitcoin staking protocols like Babylon, are now reshaping this narrative. These innovations can unlock Bitcoin’s dormant capital and create financial solutions that attract both retail and institutional investors. With venture capital flowing into Bitcoin DeFi projects and forecasts predicting a $47 billion Bitcoin layer-2 ecosystem, 2025 is poised to be the year Bitcoin asserts its position in the DeFi space.

Bitcoin’s emerging opportunity

Ethereum currently dominates DeFi due to its smart contract capabilities and dynamic ecosystem, capturing over half of the total value locked in crypto. Bitcoin, in comparison, has had a limited role in DeFi as it’s been constrained by its lack of programmability and slow block times.

Recent advancements aim to change that, though, and developers are positioning Bitcoin as more than an asset. Merging Bitcoin’s liquidity with Ethereum’s programmability could create a hybrid DeFi model that combines Bitcoin’s security and dormant capital with Ethereum’s thriving ecosystem and drive for innovation. By leveraging proposals like BitVM and trustless bridges, hybrid blockchains could expand DeFi’s reach, unlocking new use cases and driving broader adoption across retail and institutional users.

Bringing  scalability to Bitcoin

Developers have explored several approaches to bring programmability and DeFi capabilities to Bitcoin, each addressing specific challenges. Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) enables interaction with Ethereum’s DeFi ecosystem, but it is heavily centralized. To convert Bitcoin into WBTC or redeem WBTC for Bitcoin, users must go through an authorized merchant and comply with know your customer and anti-money laundering regulations. Users must also trust the custodian to manage and safeguard the Bitcoin reserves. This is where BitVM comes in to offer a breakthrough, with two main objectives being enabling true Bitcoin rollups and trust-minimised Bitcoin bridges. BitVM introduces the ability to execute programs on Bitcoin without requiring protocol changes

In practice, this means BitVM allows Bitcoin to support complex decentralized applications and financial operations, such as lending or token swaps. By bridging BTC to a Bitcoin-secured layer-2 in a trust-minimized way, we are able to dramatically increase utility while preserving core principles of security and decentralization.

BitVM positions Bitcoin as more than a store of value. It paves the way for Bitcoin to play a central role in DeFi, combining utility and trust to meet the demands of an evolving financial landscape.

The opportunity for retail and institutional investors

Before 2025, Bitcoin’s role in DeFi has been slowly gaining traction and platforms like Babylon are already facilitating billions in staking deposits. A large pool of Bitcoin holders are eager to put their assets to work, earning yields through BTC staking. Until now, limited technology and infrastructure, along with a lack of trust-minimized solutions, have been significant barriers. However, this surge in activity highlights growing confidence among investors in Bitcoin’s potential to unlock new financial opportunities in 2025.

Bitcoin’s unmatched $2 trillion market cap, robust security, and global trust mean it is uniquely positioned to bridge the gap for retail and institutional investors who have previously avoided DeFi due to concerns about regulation or risk. Its scale and reputation provide a foundation for the mainstream adoption of DeFi.

Bitcoin DeFi is now a movement. With key innovations and a growing TVL, it can compete, and possibly surpass Ethereum in the DeFi space. As we get further into 2025, the narrative is shifting. Those who recognize Bitcoin’s unlocked potential now will be poised to benefit as the ecosystem continues to evolve.

Ether (ETH) continued its multi-day slide on Thursday with a 7% drop in the past 24 hours as the prolonged crypto sell-off showed no signs of a pause.

Bitcoin (BTC) was trading between $89,000 to $82,500 in U.S. trading hours on Wednesday, staging a slight recovery in early Asian hours to just over $86,000. The broader market tracked by CoinDesk 20 (CD20), a liquid index tracking the largest tokens, fell over 3%.

Major tokens XRP, BNB Chain’s BNB, Cardano’s ADA and dogecoin (DOGE) slumped as much as 4% — with bullish bets on futures tracking majors recording over $600 million in liquidations.

Litecoin’s LTC and Aptos’ APT were among the few tokens in green, rising over 10% each. APT rose as a “BITWISE APTOS ETF” was registered in Delaware, USA, in addition to rumors of a Litecoin ETF. However, traders remain muted on prospects of a prolonged rally in LTC.

“Its unlikely that institutional investors would have long-term conviction in the Bitcoin clone, as it offers no yield, utility, or organic demand outside of ETF approval speculation,” Ben Yorke, WOO VP of Ecosystem, told CoinDesk in a Telegram message.

“Would likely be a ‘sell the news’ event, as investors would look to rotate into more topical trends and future ETF rumors,” Yorke added.

Losses in crypto markets mirrored those in U.S. equities after lesser-than-expected earnings from technology stalwart Nvidia failed to wow investors.

Separately, a New York Fed research indicated President Donald Trump’s latest tariffs on imports from China impact the American economy higher than expected — with data showing an apparent discrepancy in U.S. imports from China based on reported figures from both countries.

Market watchers await macroeconomic cues for a bitcoin rally, meanwhile.

“The Fed is not a player at this juncture as rate cuts are likely to be muted against sticky inflation, while the aggressive US administration will continue to put geopolitical tensions at the forefront,” Chris Yu, Co-Founder and CEO of SignalPlus, told CoinDesk in a Telegram message.

“Crypto-friendly policies and frameworks will likely take some time before they materialize into tangible frameworks, while a fall in implied BTC volatility with falling prices is a negative sign that speculators have started to throw in the towel on higher prices in the near term,” Yu added.

[CoinDesk]

Ripple Labs is working to expand the XRP Ledger’s decentralized finance (DeFi) capabilities with a clear roadmap for 2025. A key part of this roadmap is the addition of decentralized identity (DID) and credential-based verification, allowing for permissioned exchanges and decentralized markets that meet regulatory standards. This is designed to enable financial institutions to participate securely in the decentralized space while ensuring compliance with regulations like AML and KYC.

Ripple is also focusing on tokenization through the XRP Ledger, enabling tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) to be traded on the blockchain. Multi-purpose tokens (MPTs) are being developed to represent various financial products, such as bonds or structured assets, and provide more flexibility than traditional tokens. The platform’s goal is to bridge traditional finance and blockchain, offering a way to tokenize and trade assets with ease.

A significant part of Ripple’s strategy includes the development of a permissioned decentralized exchange (DEX), where tokenized RWAs can be traded. This exchange will utilize XRP Ledger’s decentralized identifiers to integrate compliance checks into smart contracts, ensuring all participants meet regulatory requirements. Along with a credit-based DeFi lending protocol, these initiatives aim to position the XRP Ledger (XRPL) as a secure, scalable platform for institutional use in decentralized markets.

Ripple’s plans also include expanding XRPL’s programmability. The introduction of "Extensions" will allow developers to create customized features like automated market makers (AMMs) or escrows without the need for full smart contracts. Additionally, Ripple is launching an Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) sidechain in Q2 2025, enabling developers to build decentralized applications (DApps) on XRPL using Solidity, thereby increasing compatibility with Ethereum’s ecosystem.

The goal is to tap into the $30 trillion market of tokenized RWAs, which could significantly increase XRPL’s value. Currently, XRPL has a total value locked (TVL) of about $80 million, far behind Ethereum's $50 billion, which shows its growth potential. Despite this, the network's total market cap surpassed $128 billion after XRP’s price surged by 300% following Donald Trump’s election victory. His administration’s stance on blockchain and cryptocurrency regulation could also further benefit XRPL, as Ripple hopes the regulatory environment becomes more favorable.

Ripple has made strides in this direction, including the successful launch of its decentralized exchange (DEX), which saw over $1 billion in swaps since its launch in 2024. This, along with the broader expansion into tokenization and DeFi lending, demonstrates Ripple’s commitment to making XRP Ledger a key player in the future of decentralized finance. Despite competition from other blockchain platforms, these initiatives are crucial for Ripple to continue growing and maintain its relevance in the evolving financial landscape.

Donald Trump’s supporters have lost more than $12bn (£9.5bn) in a month after the value of the president’s cryptocurrency collapsed.

$Trump, a so-called “meme coin” unveiled on Jan 17, three days before Mr Trump’s inauguration, has lost more than 80pc of its value since its peak on Jan 19.

This has led to its overall worth falling from a peak of $15bn to $2.7bn on Thursday, as it suffered amid a wider crypto rout.

The paper value of the coins owned by Mr Trump himself has also fallen by $50bn.

While Mr Trump’s own losses have not been crystallised, investors are on the hook after spending heavily to back the Trump coin in the run-up to his inauguration, partly as a show of support but also as a gamble that the token would rise in value.

However, interest in the project has since dwindled, accompanied by a wider market crash.

Bitcoin has lost a fifth of its value since hitting an all-time high on the day of Mr Trump’s inauguration.

An official Melania Trump meme coin promoted by the First Lady has fared even worse, dropping 94pc since Jan 20.

Mr Trump has vowed to be the first “crypto president”, recently appointing venture capitalist David Sacks as the White House’s “crypto tsar”.

However, investors have expressed disappointment at the supposed lack of momentum, highlighting Mr Trump’s failure to create a strategic Bitcoin reserve.

US Democrats have sought to target Mr Trump’s crypto ventures by announcing plans to put forward laws that would prevent senior government officials and their families from launching meme coins.

Sam Liccardo, a Democratic Congressman, said he planned to put forward the Modern Emoluments and Malfeasance Enforcement (Meme) Act on Thursday.

He told ABC News: “The Trumps’ issuance of meme coins financially exploits the public for personal gain, and raises the spectre of insider trading and foreign influence over the Executive Branch.”

The proposed law would apply to the president, vice president, members of Congress and White House officials, as well as their family members.

Online influencers have launched a series of meme coins in recent months seeking to capitalise on their often short-lived fame, and many often collapse after an initial spike in value.

While supporters of mainstream cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum are seen by their supporters as a potential way to change payments and finance, meme coins have little use. Instead, they are seen as a way of showing support for certain personalities or a form of gambling.

[The Telegraph]

With well-grounded fears of a trade war swirling and causing volatility in the traditional financial sector as well as in cryptocurrencies, you don't have to be a particularly skittish investor to be concerned about your portfolio at the moment. Even quality assets like XRP (CRYPTO: XRP) and Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) are showing some shakiness.

But between those two, if a full-on trade war actually does break out as a result of the Trump administration's policies, which one has a better chance of holding up, or perhaps even climbing? Let's analyze the argument for each, starting with XRP.

The setup looks bearish here

For XRP to gain in value, at least two things need to happen. First, banks and financial institutions need to buy and hold the coin, and they need to believe that doing so will help them avoid currency exchange fees as well as international money transfer fees; they need to see that using the crypto is a better option than legacy money-transfer technologies.

Second, those banks need to transact with one another regularly across international borders, thereby generating usage fees, which are paid back to the XRP network.

If there is a trade war, the incentives for the first scenario to continue occurring will remain the same, and there could be some positive effects for XRP. The actual size of each transfer may even increase, if parties need to include the costs of tariffs in their transfers. That won't necessarily generate much more in fees, though, as XRP only charges a fraction of a penny per transaction.

The problem here is that extensive tariffs may reduce the volume of goods exchanged as a result of buyers facing higher prices. With fewer goods exchanged, fewer international money transfers need to happen. And that means XRP will almost certainly generate less in fees if there's a trade war.

There's no rule that says the price of the coin needs to drop if that happens. But if trading volumes drop, it isn't good news for investors, which detracts from the argument for buying XRP if the trade situation worsens.

Is this coin a real safe harbor?

Bitcoin's price hasn't changed much at all over the last three months, which suggests that the market is ambivalent about its value holding up in a trade war.

And it's hard to articulate precisely how the coin's value would decrease if the barriers to trade became higher for the U.S., aside from a generalized retreat from risk assets that it might cause as investors give in to fear. It isn't used extensively as a medium of exchange for trade payments, or for much else. Nor would its core value-generation mechanisms -- scarcity and mining difficulty -- change whatsoever.

It is both tragic and infuriating that those who allegedly led Nigeria into its current state of economic and political disrepair are the same ones still clutching onto power, refusing to loosen their grip on a country they have run aground. It is as though, after bleeding the nation dry, they now circle its carcass like vultures, scavenging whatever is left for themselves and their cronies.

The Nigerian economy, once full of promise, is now characterized by an unbearable cost of living, a depreciating currency, and an overwhelming sense of hopelessness among its citizens. Under successive administrations, corruption, nepotism, and policy failures have driven the nation into an abyss. Yet, rather than making way for fresh, visionary leadership, the same figures who orchestrated Nigeria’s decline continue to dominate the political space, either directly or through their surrogates.

Despite countless economic summits, policy reviews, and supposed interventions, the situation has worsened over the years. The cost of food, transportation, and basic utilities has soared beyond the reach of ordinary Nigerians, while salaries remain stagnant. Inflation has eroded the purchasing power of the middle class, pushing more people into poverty. Meanwhile, the ruling elite continue to enjoy lavish lifestyles, insulated from the economic struggles faced by the majority.

In a just society, those responsible for economic mismanagement and national decay should have been held accountable. They should have faced investigations, and where necessary, prosecutions. But in Nigeria, these individuals remain in the corridors of power, still making decisions that impact millions of suffering citizens. Worse still, they disguise themselves as the saviors of a nation they helped ruin, offering so-called reforms that are nothing but recycled failures. They use state resources to fund their extravagant lifestyles, amassing wealth through shady government contracts, misappropriation of funds, and the outright looting of public assets.

The political elite in Nigeria have mastered the art of self-preservation. They form alliances not for national progress but for their own survival. When one of their own is in danger of losing political relevance, a new strategy is quickly devised to keep them in circulation. They move from one political party to another, rebrand themselves as reformists, and continue to exploit the nation’s resources with impunity. It is not uncommon to see political figures who once governed poorly return to power in a different capacity, using state machinery to suppress opposition and perpetuate their hold on governance.

This cycle of exploitation is further sustained by a political system that rewards mediocrity, discourages accountability, and suppresses the will of the people. Elections in Nigeria are often a mere formality, where the highest bidder secures victory, not the most competent or visionary candidate. As a result, governance is reduced to a transactional endeavor, where the interests of the masses are secondary to the ambitions of the elite. The same individuals who once mismanaged public funds are rebranded and repackaged to return to the helm of affairs, ensuring that the country never experiences the true change it so desperately needs.

The suffering of ordinary Nigerians is evident everywhere, on the streets, in marketplaces, in homes, and even in educational institutions. Youth unemployment remains alarmingly high, leading to frustration, crime, and the loss of valuable human potential. Nigeria’s young population, once regarded as its greatest asset, has become one of its most neglected groups, with many struggling to find opportunities for growth. Meanwhile, those who led the country into this quagmire continue to send their children abroad for quality education while domestic institutions crumble under poor funding and neglect.

One would expect that the dire economic conditions, marked by hyperinflation, fuel scarcity, and soaring unemployment, would force a radical departure from this destructive status quo. However, the political elite remain insulated from the suffering of ordinary Nigerians. Their wealth, mostly acquired through dubious means, allows them to live in luxury while the common citizen struggles to afford basic necessities. They continue to manipulate the masses, using tribal, religious, and ethnic sentiments to distract the people from their real enemy, corrupt governance.

The question remains: “How long will this tragic cycle continue?” When will Nigeria be freed from the grip of those who have drained its lifeblood? The answers lie in the hands of the people. Until Nigerians demand real accountability, resist the recycling of failed leaders, and insist on genuine political and economic reforms, the nation will continue to be held hostage by the same individuals who led it to its current state.

It is time for Nigerians to wake up. The future of this country cannot be left in the hands of those who have repeatedly failed to deliver meaningful change. Civil society organizations, youth groups, and progressive movements must rise to challenge the status quo. The people must reject politicians who have nothing new to offer, those who have looted the treasury, and those who see governance as a personal entitlement rather than a service to the nation.

Nigeria is not yet beyond redemption, but the path to recovery requires that those who contributed to its downfall relinquish their hold on power. If they refuse to do so willingly, it is the duty of the electorate to force them out through democratic means. The country must move beyond political theatrics and demand real, measurable progress. Anything less is an insult to the suffering millions who still hold onto hope for a better Nigeria.

The time for action is now. The burden of saving Nigeria falls on the shoulders of its citizens, who must refuse to be pawns in a game played by those who see the country as their personal fiefdom. The future of the nation depends on its people’s collective resolve to break the cycle of recycled leadership, hold wrongdoers accountable, and chart a new course toward prosperity and genuine progress.