CEOs rarely win in the game of geopolitics
Companies need to tread a fine line between taking geostrategy seriously and becoming instruments of national power
DeeperDive is a beta AI feature. Refer to full articles for the facts.
BY TRADITION, broadsheet newspapers put political stories, domestic and foreign, in the front half of the paper and business and finance stories in the back half. But how much longer can the tradition last? Where do you put a story about protests over Volkswagen’s plant in Xinjiang Province? Or about Elon Musk’s agonies over whether to supply his Starlink service to the Ukrainian armed forces?
As geopolitics and business collide, the distinction between the “front half” and the “back half” dissolves.
Companies that once dreamed of a borderless world are having to deal with a world fragmenting along ideological lines. And governments that once dreamed of shrinking the state are increasingly treating corporations as instruments of national power: hence the US Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security, the Department of Homeland Security’s Cyber Safety Review Board, and the White House’s Council on Supply Chain Resilience.
Decoding Asia newsletter: your guide to navigating Asia in a new global order. Sign up here to get Decoding Asia newsletter. Delivered to your inbox. Free.
Share with us your feedback on BT's products and services
TRENDING NOW
Air India asks Tata, Singapore Airlines for funds after US$2.4 billion loss
‘Boring’ is the new black: The stars are aligning for a Singapore stock market revival
From 1MDB to ‘corporate mafia’: Is Malaysia facing a new governance test?
South-east Asian markets account for 8.8% of global capital inflows from 2021 to 2024: report