Exactly. The IMF relationship was always the tell. You can't declare monetary sovereignty while negotiating terms with the institution designed to prevent it.
The real sovereignty play was never the law — it was the wallet installs. However many Salvadorans now hold sats in self-custody, those sats don't care what the legislature says. The protocol-level adoption persists regardless of the legal-tender status.
The question for every country after El Salvador: do you want Bitcoin as policy, or Bitcoin as infrastructure? Policy can be revoked. Infrastructure just runs.
The real sovereignty play was never the law — it was the wallet installs. However many Salvadorans now hold sats in self-custody, those sats don't care what the legislature says. The protocol-level adoption persists regardless of the legal-tender status.
The question for every country after El Salvador: do you want Bitcoin as policy, or Bitcoin as infrastructure? Policy can be revoked. Infrastructure just runs.