Technological Power and Geopolitical Risk: The New Fault Lines of a Fragmented World Order

Key Points

• The structure of international relations is marked by increasing fragmentation, primarily fueled by a struggle for strategic and technological primacy between the United States and China .
• This competition materializes into concrete risks for global supply chains, particularly in the semiconductor sector, due to their critical dependence on rare earths .
• Geopolitical risk is no longer an abstract concept reserved for states, but a factor with direct and measurable effects at the corporate level, forcing them to integrate this new reality into their strategies .
• Policymakers operate in a "polycrisis" environment, where multiple and interdependent crises demand new analytical and management tools, such as artificial intelligence, to navigate the complexity of contemporary foreign policy .

An International Order Fragmented by Technological Competition

The analysis of current global dynamics reveals an erosion of traditional frameworks of thought, confronted with a world undergoing profound change . At the heart of this transformation is a fierce competition for technological power, which is reshaping alliances and rivalries. This struggle for strategic primacy, led primarily by the United States and China, is the driving force behind an increasingly fragmented international order . Technology is no longer just a tool for economic development or military power; it has become the main battlefield where tomorrow's global hierarchy is being played out. This confrontation is not limited to simple commercial competition but encompasses the control of standards, critical infrastructure, and disruptive innovations.

This fragmentation is manifested by the questioning of multilateral institutions and the emergence of competing blocs. Each power pole seeks to secure its own technological ecosystems, from artificial intelligence to 5G, including biotechnologies. This dynamic generates structural mistrust that complicates cooperation on global issues. The Ramses 2027 publication also highlights the major adaptation challenges facing the European Union in this context, as well as the uncertainty surrounding the posture of the Americas, potentially under a new Trump administration . These two historical actors must redefine their positioning in the face of the Sino-American technological bipolarity that now structures the global chessboard.

Strategic Value Chains at the Heart of Tensions

Geopolitical rivalry translates into tangible economic vulnerabilities, particularly visible in the supply chains of strategic sectors. The case of semiconductors is emblematic of this new reality. A scientific study has developed an analytical framework to assess the risks weighing on this sector, highlighting its critical dependence on rare earths . These materials, whose production is geographically concentrated, become levers of geopolitical pressure. Control over their extraction, refining, and export confers a major strategic advantage, transforming an economic dependence into a national security flaw.

The interconnection between dependence on rare earths and semiconductor production perfectly illustrates how the competition for technological power impacts the global economy. Sanctions, export restrictions, and industrial policies aimed at self-sufficiency become weapons in this confrontation. The fragility of these value chains, once optimized for efficiency and cost reduction, is now exposed. States and companies are forced to rethink their logistical and industrial architecture to integrate resilience as a strategic imperative, which may involve relocations, diversification of suppliers, or massive investments in national production capacities.

The Direct Impact of Geopolitical Risk on Economic Actors

Long considered a background variable for businesses, geopolitical risk has become a direct and quantifiable operational factor. Academic works have specifically focused on the effects of this risk at the firm level, demonstrating its influence on their investment decisions, financial performance, and international expansion strategies . Companies can no longer merely observe international tensions from afar; they are directly affected by sanctions, trade wars, political instability in their key markets, and the volatility of regulatory policies.

This new reality forces economic actors to develop geopolitical analysis and anticipation capabilities. Managing this risk becomes an essential skill for boards of directors and management teams. This involves constant strategic monitoring, mapping the political dependencies of their value chains, and developing crisis scenarios. The impact is concretely measured: increased insurance costs, the need to build strategic stocks, freezing of investment projects, or reorientation of trade flows. The boundary between the economic and geopolitical spheres blurs, forcing companies themselves to become geopolitical actors, aware of their role and vulnerabilities in an unstable international environment.

Navigating the "Polycrisis": New Tools and Influence Strategies

The current context is increasingly described by the concept of "polycrisis," a situation where multiple global crises (health, climate, economic, geopolitical) intertwine and mutually amplify each other. Managing foreign policy in this systemic complexity represents an unprecedented challenge for states . To address this, new tools are being explored, notably artificial intelligence, which offers opportunities to analyze vast datasets, model complex scenarios, and potentially improve decision-making. However, AI also presents risks, particularly in terms of algorithmic bias, cybersecurity, and unintentional conflict escalation.

In this complex arena, influence strategies are diversifying. Beyond technological and economic power, "soft power" remains a relevant instrument. China, for example, actively deploys an influence strategy on the African continent, as illustrated by its relations with Morocco . This approach aims to build economic and cultural partnerships to establish its presence and secure its long-term interests. These multiple influence strategies, whether technological, economic, or cultural, are the different facets of the global competition that characterizes the current polycrisis.

Uncertainties and Analytical Blind Spots

This analysis is primarily based on academic publications that provide a robust conceptual framework for understanding underlying trends. However, it is limited by a notable absence of factual information on specific events. Tensions in the Middle East, particularly between the United States and Iran, as well as the activities of state-sponsored cyber actors like North Korea, have been identified as potentially major friction points but could not be analyzed in detail, as the content of the corresponding sources was missing . Similarly, OSINT or alert-type sources only provided identifiers without exploitable content, preventing an analysis rooted in recent events .

Consequently, the picture painted focuses on the structural Sino-American rivalry in the technological domain and its economic repercussions, as this is the best-documented subject by the available sources. Dynamics specific to other regions or other types of threats (terrorism, regional conflicts outside great power competition) are not covered. The analysis of Chinese soft power in Africa, for example, remains very superficial, based solely on an article title . It is therefore important to consider this note as an analysis of the structural forces shaping the geopolitical landscape, while recognizing that many conjunctural events and dynamics could not be integrated due to a lack of source data. The question remains how these structural tensions will interact with unforeseen regional crises.