Trend: Shift in the geopolitical landscape

A trend indicates a direction of change in values and needs which is driven by forces and manifests itself already in various ways within certain groups in society.

World geopolitics are changing. Traditionally committed to a role as the enforcer of geopolitical order, the United States of America (US) is more concentrated on internal policy issues than on foreign policy now. This disengagement of the US allows the rise of other global powers, such as China and Russia, who are competing with and sharing the role of global leader with the US. Among these global changes, the EU is starting to think about defending itself. The EU efforts for a research and development landscape with collaborative industrial action in the defence and aerospace sectors, and the support of the financial tool of the European Defence Fund (EDF), can be considered a breakthrough.

With a changed horizon, other non-military factors have become relevant for geopolitical purposes. These could be identified as ‘Geo-economics’, where the use of economic tools are applied to advance geopolitical objectives. Typical geo-economic instruments include: trade control, investment policy, economic and financial sanctions, energy and commodities, aid policies, data management, communication infrastructures and cyberspace control, but also the management or regulation of migration and the application of restrictive measures against human rights violations.
 

This Trend is part of the Megatrend Changing security paradigm

Manifestations

Developments happening in certain groups in society that indicate examples of change related to the trend.

Disengagement of the US in foreign policy

After the Soviet Union’s collapse, the US became the de facto enforcer of the geopolitical order. This role of the US was supported by a common view among Americans on this foreign policy. However in recent years, ideological lines between the US parties grew starker and foreign policy views began to mirror broader trends in the US electorate. As a result, the US has retreated from its role of global superpower.

This fact is having far-reaching consequences and other countries are trying to fill the resulting power vacuum. Some are increasing their efforts to have a central role in a more communal, but not necessarily more stable world geopolitical order. This is the case particularly for China and Russia at the global level, but also Turkey and India acting at the local level. In this landscape the EU has the possibility and somehow the necessity to emerge as a global power too. 

Signals of change: RAND Corporation, Carniege Europe, The Republic

China evolving framework

China is willing to becoming a global power. President Xi of China has pledged “to complete the modernization of China’s armed forces by 2035 and build a world-class military capable of winning wars across all theatres by 2050”. At the centre of the efforts to modernise China’s People Liberation Army there is a strong focus on technologies, particularly big data and AI.

China’s geopolitical power is not solely based on its military force, but also derives from its capacity to take advantage of geo-economic factors such as the direct control of resources (e.g. rare earths), data logistics, trade imbalances, extraterritorial control and sanctions. In December 2020 China enacted an export control law that tightened restrictions on the shipments of ‘strategic goods’. This form of extraterritorial control, involving also the use of ‘blacklists’, is a tool which has typically been used by the US and is now also used by China to expand its economic influence and its rule of law in foreign affairs.

Signals of change: Rand, Catamhouse, Nikkei Asia, EP, The Guardian,

Strategic autonomy

The EU’s capacity and freedom to act, i.e. its ambition to assume greater responsibility for its own security, reduce one-sided dependencies in critical areas and strengthen its capacity to set and implement its own priorities - is known in political jargon terms as ‘Strategic Autonomy’. Strategic Autonomy aspects are important drivers for new military technologies and also for geopolitics. When analysing strategic autonomy one aspect typically highlighted is the production of ‘rare earths’. Rare earths are raw materials that are essential to many civilian and military technologies and therefore, are of strategic significance for the economic and military security of the West.

The production of electronic components and subsystems are also relevant for the EU’s strategic autonomy, such as the cyber-dimension of the technology supply chain. Decreasing the EU’s dependence on foreign technologies is important in order to prevent cybersecurity issues that might impact defence applications, such as backdoors, non-secure vulnerable components, etc. Also, data logistics should be considered (for strategic autonomy), since cloud computing services (data storage) are mainly owned by China and the US. The EU has started to tackle the issue of strategic autonomy addressing these aspects in various initiatives.

Signals of change: European Council on Foreign Relations, EC, PR Newswire, Weinian Hu

Trade and export control

Trade deals can be used to establish relationships between countries and controlling the trade of military 'dual use' goods (i.e. those for both civil and military application), or strategic products is fundamental to making sanctions effective (i.e. penalties on countries that disobey international rules). The EU has a solid set of regulations on the export and trade of 'dual use' goods that is well framed and embedded in international treaties, agreements, conventions and resolutions. They are represented by EC Regulation 428/2009, which became 'Recast' in 2021. These regulatory tools need to be viewed holistically alongside measures to strengthen strategic autonomy, independence and security matters. Particularly important for trade is the control of strategic assets by foreign investors (Foreign Direct Investments). The protection of EU companies from foreign acquisition has recently been the subject of a specific EU regulation.

The 2020 shortages in the supply of personal protective equipment (PPE) and products necessary to prevent Covid-19 diffusion, have led to a further expansion of the export authorisation concept, temporarily applying it to vaccines.

Signals of change: EC, EC, EC, Euronews, JDSUPRA

Migration and human rights

The management of migration fluxes and humanitarian crises have gained importance. They are becoming the most common geo-economic instrument used to advance geopolitical objectives. Migration is a complex issue affected by several causes, such as war, resource scarcity, the economy and environmental sustainability. It has various consequences in Europe and around the world, particularly on internal policies. The EU’s population is ageing, its labour force is decreasing and concerns are rising over the sustainability of the European pension schemes, healthcare systems and social welfare. Conversely, in several EU countries there are concerns linked to an increase in asylum claims, or even to EU internal migration. This is impacting national policies and also putting the EU unification process at risk. The EU should take migration issues seriously, assess its work force needs and forecasts, understand if and how it can integrate migrants, considering the different religions and cultures, and learn from successful integration examples and failures.

Another aspect that could become relevant from a geo-economic perspective, is the protection of human rights. The EU gave great priority to this recently with a Council Regulation (EU 2021) concerning restrictive measures against serious human rights violations and abuses. EU sanctions are a foreign policy tool, which among others, help to achieve key EU objectives such as preserving peace, strengthening international security, consolidating and supporting democracy and equality. 

Signals of change: BBC news, Bloomberg, The Brussels Times

Hybrid warfare

Managing and creating grey conflict (i.e. pursuing political objectives through operations that fall between peaceful and war tactics) have been an important part of Russia and China’s activities in the international arena. Grey conflict is used to avoid triggering a military response, or to compensate for an asymmetry of power. Russia engages a mixture of political, economic and subversive activities to extend its sphere of influence, notably in its involvement in Crimea, East Ukraine, Georgia, Syria, Libya and Venezuela.

China has actively used various hybrid tactics, from diplomatic assertions and deliberate use of fishery/maritime law enforcement forces, to seizures of disputed islands in the South China Sea, and ‘debt traps’ for Sri Lanka and Kenya, as well as various tactics with regard to Taiwan. However, the hybrid arsenal is available to an increasing number of countries, who are increasingly likely to be more involved in grey zone conflicts in the future.  
 

Signals of change: National Interest, Reuters, The Daily Signal

European awareness

The awareness that European Countries are stronger together is the fundamental driver of all security and defence trends. The planning of actions, policies and industrial strategies together is the key to having more efficacy on military expenditures and outcomes. It reinforces military capacities, allows the mobilisation of more research and development resources, and fosters the development of new technologies sooner.

A 'European mind-set' is necessary to strengthen the industrial and research capacities of the Union. Aligning the views of European countries allows them to become a stronger player in the new geopolitical stage (including and beyond the EU 27). This should not be only an aspiration, because it is necessary in order to be able to tackle the crises arising from the present changing geopolitical equilibrium.

Different EU regions have different priorities: southern countries look at the Mediterranean issues (migration and so on) while northern countries look at the East-border issues (and other). Europe should have a shared, common horizon, in order to be more effective. Despite the fact that the EU has the third largest defence budget in the world, few analysts consider it to be ranked the third military power. 

Signals of change: ICDS, The Brussels Times, RAND

Interesting questions

What might this trend imply, what should we be aware of, what could we study in more depth? Some ideas:

• Considering the EU as a whole, with its capital of human resources, the magnitude of its industry, its economic, military and trade power, the Union has the potential to gain geopolitical advantage and more security in the new world order. The EU has common rules and regulations, but the implementation and the willingness to act is in the hands of the Member States. Will member States ever understand the huge advantages they would have thinking as a single EU? 

• The US will not reverse their position soon, and in this vacuum other countries will continue to take geopolitical advantage and grab resources. Migration flows will continue, as will technological advancement in many sectors, including data management and communication. Are European citizens and governments willing to embrace the changes and become a central player in the new world (and tech) stage, or do they just want to continue as they are now? 

• Does Europe need a crisis to progress? Considering the positive reaction of Europe in the face of the Covid-19 crisis, it could be regrettably and provocatively observed that Europe could benefit from a geopolitical crises as a driver of unified action.