True, good point. I guess my argument is that it's a bad attack.

Ambiguities for interpretation in official documentation like this are, at minimum, targets for legal attacks. The vagueness of the word "crypto-currency" leaves a lot of wiggle room for either party (the IMF or Argentina's central bank) to exploit.

If Argentina, say, wanted to issue a CBDC, could that CBDC then not use any kind of ECDSA? Define "crypto-currency." It makes IMF into an authority of defining "crypto" for its own benefit until intermediation is required. In the meantime, it sets up a grey zone for those who are willing to move quickly and ask for forgiveness later.