THIS PIECE IS WRITTEN BASED ON THE AUTHOR'S BELIEFS AND OPINIONS, THEY DO NOT REFLECT WHAT THE INQUIRER ITSELF BELIEVES. WE RESPECT THE RIGHT TO HAVING YOUR OWN OPINIONS.
It is hard to ignore, living in today's world, how geopolitics drives our economic realities. This emerging U.S.-China rivalry isn't about mere power plays; the struggle between these two nations reshapes industries and supply chains, and will even shape the way countries go about dealing with climate change. An enthusiast of innovation and global cooperation, I am concerned that this competition will set the bar higher for national interests agaidnst collective progress.
Image: Nash Weerasekera/Foreign Policy
Take the semiconductor industry, for example. The U.S. is investing billions in reshoring chip manufacturing, while China ramps up its own production to reduce dependency on American technology. This arms race in tech innovation is exciting, but it comes at a cost. The more countries isolate themselves with trade barriers and export bans, the more the global economy fragments.
Meanwhile, resource nationalism is on the rise. From lithium to cobalt, critical minerals needed to achieve a renewable energy and transportation transition are in hot pursuit of government control. I do understand the rationale for securing such important resources, but it does seem awfully short-sighted. When we will need collaboration, we see competition. We see a dash toward a situation that may only deepen global inequity, leaving developing nations at a disadvantage.
But it is not all bad. The tension is forcing governments and companies to innovate, especially in the areas of green energy and AI. I believe competition, if managed well, inspires progress. But the question is whether we will use these advancements to build a more sustainable world or whether we will let rivalry dictate our future.
To me, this is a moment of choice: to let geopolitical competition drive us into deeper divides, or to steer it toward fostering resilience and shared growth. The world watches, and stakes couldn't be higher.
Comments