Do it yourself

The rivalry between the United States and China is often described as a new Cold War. While the comparison is tempting, it is also misleading. The Cold War (US vs USSR) was characterized by ideological separation (Communism vs free market), minimal economic interaction, and rigid alliances (NATO vs Warsaw). Present conditions are materially different. The US and China are deeply economically intertwined. Trade volumes are substantial. Supply chains are integrated. Financial markets are linked. Neither side can afford full disengagement without significant self-inflicted damage. What is happening instead is selective rivalry to gain advantage in the terms of trade and control over resources. Both countries are focusing on the sectors they consider strategically sensitive, e.g., advanced technology, defense-related manufacturing, data infrastructure, and critical resources. In these areas, they are adopting a policy of control rather than cooperation. In other sectors, pragmatic engageme...

For much of modern history, power was mostly measured by military strength. Borders shifted through conquest, and influence was enforced through force. In the past couple of decades, there has been a gradual shift in this paradigm. While military capability still matters, the primary instruments of power today are economic and technology. In the contemporary world, access to capital, technology, markets, and resources often determines outcomes more effectively than armies. Trade rules can shape behavior. Financial sanctions can immobilize economies. Control over technology standards can define the future of entire industries. Unlike traditional warfare, economic power operates quietly. There are no declarations, no battlefields, and no formal endings. Yet its effects can be just as lasting.   The latest events in Venezuela also need to be looked at from this Lense. Export controls, tariffs, financial restrictions, and regulatory barriers are now routine tools of statecraft. They ar...

The idea of a “global reset” has gained popularity in recent years. It reflects a widespread sense that the extant world order is no longer working and a fundamentally new thing needs to emerge to replace it. Total collapse of global growth in the past couple of decades, unsustainable trade balances, and excessive socialism (social security in developed countries) have raised the specter of a total collapse in the global order, just like it happened in the early part of the twentieth century. While this feeling is understandable, the term itself might be misleading, in my view. What we are witnessing may not be a reset, but a reorganization of global institutions and systems. Global systems rarely collapse overnight. Instead, they evolve unevenly, often while appearing stable on the surface. Trade continues, markets function, currencies circulate, and institutions remain intact. Yet beneath this continuity, the logic guiding decisions is changing. For much of the post–Cold War era, eco...