By Enrique Fojón. Analyst at the International Security Centre of the Francisco de Vitoria University
Technology, in fact, is one of the key determinants in shaping International Relations which, along with wars and economic change, is the key instrument for promoting economic development and National Security. In the past, technological advances shaped the industrial revolution that created the modern international system. The industrialised, technologically advanced nations accumulated and exercised their vast economic and military powers in order to establish their supremacy over the less advanced parts of the world, effectively creating a hierarchy among nations. Advances in advanced technologies, such as microelectronics, nanotechnology, biotechnology, robotics and artificial intelligence, will alter existing balances of power and shape military capabilities for future conflicts. Forecasts indicate that advances in science and technology will transform the battlefield in the coming decades.
By 2030, several states will have acquired formidable military power projection capabilities with weapons of greater range, precision and lethality for the conduct of high-intensity conflict. Flexible multi-mission response doctrines based on high-tech weapons and a diversified but integrated force structure will be the key elements of the defence policies of the major powers. Fronts" will disappear and all countries will become battlefields. Since fronts will no longer be the point of friction, long-range force projection weaponry for deep strikes, such as ballistic and cruise missiles and amphibious capabilities, will assume importance in the "frontless wars" of the future. No arms control agreement, non-proliferation regime or technology control mechanism can prevent the proliferation of technological means of warfare.
In particular, information and communication technologies (ICTs) have had a widespread impact on the dynamics of International Relations as a result of operating through four main mechanisms:
- Changing the architecture of the international system: its structure, its key organisational concepts and the relationships between its actors;
- Changing the processes by which the international system operates, including diplomacy, war, administration, policy formation, trade, commerce, finance, communications and intelligence gathering;
- Creating new issue areas, constraints and trade-offs in the foreign policy operating environment, a term that includes not only political constraints on international action, but also constraints imposed by the laws of natural and social science; and Subscribe to DeepL Pro to edit this document.
- Providing a source of insights into perceptions of security, information and transparency for the functioning of the international system, as well as new concepts and ideas for international relations theory. Technological advances and geopolitical changes It is widely accepted that four geopolitical disruptions, or fault lines, have emerged since the end of the Cold War that affect the international order:
- An authoritarian axis around China, Russia, Iran and North Korea, belying the belief that an international community had taken shape after the Cold War.
- Climate alarmism and the prohibitively expensive green transition will give way to energy sobriety, which recognises the need for abundant, reliable and cheap energy.
- A new realism is being imposed on trade, with a view to curbing the imbalance and mercantilist practices of countries such as China.
- The transformative potential of digitalisation, with the rise of artificial intelligence that will affect individuals, societies, economies and political systems in unpredictable ways. These features are not only mere drivers of the collapse of the post-Cold War architecture, but also symptoms of its failures. Moreover, they take place in the context of the relative decline of the United States as a world power.
Techno-geopolitics contemplates the interaction between technology and geopolitics, which reconfigures the dynamics imposed by the influence of power on the global stage. Technological advancement has emerged as a fundamental factor in determining the geopolitical position of a state, or other strategic actor, as it shapes the definition of new horizons for social development, economic growth, security measures and global relations.
The theory defines how technology links to the future of geopolitics. Innovation is a catalyst for geopolitical power, as the rapid revolution in technology changes the face of industry from quantum computing to biotechnology, cyber supremacy and information warfare, all of which produce new strategic advantages, influencing international relations. Two major trends are currently transforming the world. First, advances in critical and emerging technologies (such as artificial intelligence, advanced telecommunications, synthetic biology and quantum computing) are redefining global power dynamics, economics and security frameworks. Second, major geopolitical instability is altering supply chains, shifting alliances and fuelling competition for resources and technologies. These trends are converging. Technologies are not only asserting themselves on the battlefield, but are also the subject of international tensions. Governments around the world are seeking greater technological advantage and policy autonomy, using trade barriers, export and investment controls and industrial policies to reshape data flows and global supply chains. The resulting context is a highly complex system which, for business, means having to operate in an increasingly volatile environment. Leaders are under pressure to respond to and, where possible, mitigate the uncertainty and risks of this complex web of technological revolution and geopolitical disruption.
While states and companies manage different risks, employ different tools, and set both goals and motivations, both face the need to manage global risk trends while maintaining the trust of their partners or allies. Techno-geopolitical uncertainty is defined as the propensity for disruptions caused by significant changes in policies adopted by powerful nation states seeking interlocking techno-nationalist and geopolitical gains vis-à-vis rival states. The rise of techno-geopolitical uncertainty takes place in the context of a liberal international order in crisis. Over the past 70 years, global economic activity has been governed by an expanding liberal international order. After World War II, the United States and its allies created a complex system of global governance that was organised around openness, rules and multilateral cooperation. Over time, the US became the hegemonic leader of this order, anchoring alliances, stabilising the global economy and upholding 'free world' values. This US-led order expanded outwards after the Cold War, with countries in East Asia, Eastern Europe and Latin America adopting pro-business reforms to boost their integration into the global economy. Growing techno-geopolitical uncertainty affects international business in many ways, calling for greater academic attention to multinational corporations both to its causes and responses. The US CHIPS and Science Act exemplifies the recent embrace of techno-nationalism for its economic rivalry with China, which has important implications for the academic and management practices of the International Business (IB) degree. The Act exhibits two characteristics that run counter to the traditional US liberal policy stance of advocating an open, rules-based multilateral system. First, its reliance on subsidies, export controls and investment controls means a move away from free trade and market-based industrial policies. Second, the use of protective barrier provisions pursues the militarisation of global value chains for geo-political and geo-economic purposes.
The Act can be seen as the showcase of a paradigm shift from market-oriented liberalism to intervention-oriented techno-nationalism, heralding a new era of zero-sum thinking and geopolitical prioritisation. Examining the broader trend of techno-nationalism, it explores the distinctive features of the Act and analyses the geographical strategies that multinational companies must adopt in response to the resulting techno-geopolitical uncertainty. The analysis highlights that paradigm shift in policymaking, identifies the root causes of this shift and examines the potential pitfalls it can create. To navigate this uncertain landscape, four strategic responses are recommended for multinational enterprises: geo-strategies, reconfiguration, resilience and corporate diplomacy. Information technology disruption fuels the option of undermining democracies before cyber superiority can be harnessed to strengthen them. To this must be added the array of powerful new technologies in the making, which are the foundation of the disruption to come. Emerging technologies will alter the global balance of power and do so faster than can be imagined.
The US-Russia case study allows for an important debate to be addressed. When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, few thought it could survive; US intelligence services estimated that Kiev would fall within two weeks. Outgunned and outnumbered, Ukraine turned its territory into a tough battleground for aggressive enemies like Russia. Just two years earlier, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky had estimated that the reputed digital transformation application 'Diia', an open-source intelligence-gathering mechanism where citizens and security forces can upload videos and information to the command centre, without giving any chance that Russia could hack these backups. Ukraine became a Starlink satellite to counter Russia's geostrategic advantages using the latest technology. When Russia sent the Iranian-made drones, Ukraine easily intercepted the drones' movements and disabled them with an advanced missile system. In turn, the Ukrainian army is familiar with the use of Western-supplied weapons on the battlefield. Kiev's success would not have been possible without the attitude of the brave Ukrainian people who stand firm in the face of Russian aggression in clear violation of international law. War and the battlefield will be evaluated according to knowledge and information supremacy. For example, the Ukrainians used high technology in the ongoing war against Russia, which exemplified efficient intelligence scanning, surveillance and reconnaissance of data from a variety of sources, making them an advantage against Russia in this context.
Winners in the race for emerging technology will determine the future It is a fact that emerging technologies are creating an unstable world, affecting the conception of national security. In short, we are reluctant to adapt quickly in peacetime, and that is a lesson that leaders and institutions should heed. The technological cyclone comes at a time of remarkable global instability. The bipolar stability of the Cold War is a thing of the past and the world has become multipolar, characterised by fierce competition between the Great Powers and an openly hostile group of authoritarian countries determined to undermine the liberal international order.
At the same time, countries seeking prominence are emerging, such as India, Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Indonesia, which have the political and economic weight to align themselves on multiple fronts and choose the side that best suits their national interests. As demonstrated at the recent BRICS summit in Kazan, China, with Russia's support, wants to have a greater say in how the world is organised. Added to this is the role of a complex array of non-state actors that exert significant influence through their technological or financial clout. Their influence, testimony to their wealth and their development and control of critical technologies, is power that participates in geopolitical disruption. Taken together, emerging technologies are creating an unstable world to which homeland security must adapt. Reforms will require imagination and rigour, as well as firmness in their implementation. The first duty of any government is to protect its people. To proactively address the intricate complexity presented by the intersection of geopolitics and advanced technology, businesses and governments alike must take a proactive, agile and informed approach.
Comments