Central Bank Digital Currencies, or CBDCs, are becoming one of the biggest topics in global finance. Many central banks argue that CBDCs can help bring millions of unbanked people into the formal financial system. But there is also a serious concern: if too many people move their money from commercial banks into CBDCs, itcould weaken the banking system. This paper looks at both sides of that argument by studying three countries that have already launched CBDCs: the Bahamas with its Sand Dollar, Nigeria with the eNaira, and China with the Digital Yuan. Using data from the IMF, the BIS, the World Bank, and individual central bank reports, the paper evaluates each case based on four things: how much the CBDC helped with financial inclusion, howwidely it was adopted, what impact it had on banks, and what design choices shaped the outcome. The findings show that all three CBDCs made some progress on inclusion, but none of them caused the banking instability that economists worriedabout. The main reason is simple: none of them were adopted at a large enough scale to seriously threaten commercial banks. The paper argues that the tension between financial inclusion and banking stability is not a fixed problem. It is a design problem. With the right choices, both goals can be pursued at the same time.