Visa, Mastercard and Swift have spent a lot of time and effort lobbying their _de facto_ monopoly, carefully advocating that… for lack of a better phrasing: they are essential and facilities but not “essential facilities”.
The best example of something impressive in that area is the concept of Two-sided markets, that comes with natural, customer-benefiting monopoly and even a justification for aggressive dumping baked-in in the model. I’m personally familiar with several of the contributors to that area and I can’t suspect that was ‘sponsored’ research but, Lord, you have to be lucky to get a Nobel prize to defend you.
SWIFT is just a on paper private entity, there’s a reason they are located in Belgium where also the NATO headquarters are: SWIFT is a pillar of the US empire and its client states.
How is their platform different in practical terms than libra? Libra itself is not a new currency. I believe it's pegged to the US dollar. In the real world you really pay with visa/mastercard, paypal or swift, not with "real" money.
Libra is pegged to a basket of values. I suspect that this could lead companies to prefer to store liquidity and report on Libra as it could be more stable than any individual currency, including USD.
This is the material anti-trust lawsuits are made of, there is no way that nation states will allow private enterprises to gain that much power.