Alex Capri’s interviews with Channel NewsAsia (CNA) serves as a timely entry point into the debate over the control of strategic supply chains. The most recent interview is part of Capri’s ongoing commentary on the global economic order. Capri, a thought leader on international trade and techno-nationalism, highlights how the epicenter of US-China competition has shifted from tariffs and traditional trade disputes to the command of foundational technologies and resources. His analysis, echoed in his recent book and multiple interviews, frames the current era as one marked by the weaponization of supply chains and the rise of resource nationalism.
The contest for control over strategic supply chains, not just the goods themselves, is now the beating heart of international competition. Capri notes that the world’s attention has shifted from tariffs and trade deficits to 12 power-multiplier technologies, including semiconductors, rare earths, quantum sciences, and artificial intelligence (AI), which underpin modern economies and national security. But is the quest for control over these supply chains a practical strategy, or merely an illusory pursuit in an interdependent world? And what are the consequences for national well-being and the resilience of the global system?
The Illusion and Limits of Control
The drive to command strategic supply chains is not new, but its intensity and scope have reached the highest levels. Capri’s notion of techno-nationalism, where technological prowess is inseparable from national security and economic strength, captures the zeitgeist of our era. The US dominates in semiconductors, China in rare earths processing; both nations are racing to secure their spheres of influence, reshaping the global economic order.
Yet, the ambition of full control is, in many respects, an illusion. Modern supply chains are highly complex, spanning continents, requiring specialized knowledge, capital-intensive infrastructure, and a web of suppliers and logistics partners. Many value chains are so globally distributed that even the most powerful nations cannot simply reshore or nearshore production without incurring immense costs, time, and risk. Taiwan’s dominance in advanced chip manufacturing gives it leverage, but also exposes the world to acute vulnerabilities; no single nation can replicate the ecosystem overnight.
What Accelerates—and What Hinders—Control
Several forces accelerate the push for strategic control. Geopolitical tensions, as evident in the US-China rivalry, prompt nations to decouple, reshore, and diversify their supply networks. Resource nationalism, where states assert control over critical minerals and technologies, is on the rise, often justified by the need for economic security or political leverage. The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent supply shocks exposed the complexity of globalized supply chains, prompting a reevaluation of cost-reduction-oriented just-in-time models in favor of more costly but more resilient approaches.
Technology, too, is a double-edged sword. Digitalization, AI, and advanced analytics enable greater visibility and control, allowing companies and governments to monitor and respond to disruptions more rapidly. Yet, the same interconnectedness increases vulnerability to cyberattacks and systemic risks, as digital supply chains can be disrupted by actors anywhere in the world.
What hinders control is the complexity and cost of strategic autonomy. Building redundant or parallel supply chains, particularly in sectors such as semiconductors or advanced materials, requires substantial investment, skilled talent, and years of development. Nationalistic policies can trigger retaliation, reduce economies of scale, and fragment markets, leading to higher costs, potentially inferior products, and inefficiencies for all parties. Resource nationalism can backfire: state control often leads to instability, underinvestment, and supply disruptions, as seen in the mining sectors of resource-rich but politically volatile countries.
Impact on Supply Chains: Fragmentation and Fragility
The impact on supply chain networks is profound. The era of seamless globalization has given way to fragmentation, with companies and countries building parallel networks aligned with geopolitical blocs. Supply chains are becoming increasingly regionalized, a trend that naturally started 20 years ago, with a focus on resilience, redundancy, and agility, rather than solely on cost efficiency. This shift is not without pain: costs rise, innovation may slow, and the risk of shortages increases, particularly for critical inputs concentrated in a limited number of countries.
Supply chain managers face a new equilibrium: balancing efficiency, resilience, and agility in a world where shocks are the norm. The adoption of digital tools, scenario planning, and end-to-end visibility is accelerating, but these investments take time to yield results and require new skills and mindsets.
Is Control Desirable? The National Well-Being Dilemma
Is the pursuit of strategic supply control even desirable from a national well-being perspective? The answer is nuanced. Reducing dependence on hostile or unreliable partners for critical technologies and resources is prudent, even essential, for national security and economic stability. The pandemic and recent geopolitical crises have shown that overreliance on global supply lines can threaten not only prosperity but the basic functioning of society.
However, excessive focus on self-sufficiency can undermine the goals it seeks to achieve. Autarky breeds inefficiency, raises costs for consumers and businesses, and can stifle innovation by cutting off access to global talent, ideas, and markets. Moreover, the attempt to “control” supply chains can escalate tensions, provoke retaliation, and increase the risk of conflict, as nations jostle for access to scarce resources and strategic technologies.
Risks: From Economic Costs to Geopolitical Instability
The risks of pursuing strategic control are manifold. Economically, the costs of redundancy, reshoring, and protectionism can be immense, reducing competitiveness and economic growth. Politically, resource nationalism and techno-nationalism can exacerbate tensions, disrupt markets, and trigger cycles of retaliation that harm all parties involved. The fragmentation of supply chains also increases the risk of systemic failures. If one bloc suffers a shock, its insulated networks may lack the flexibility to adapt, amplifying the impact.
Perhaps most dangerously, the weaponization of supply chains can turn economic competition into outright conflict. As Capri and others warn, the intertwining of national security and economic policy raises the stakes, making supply chain disruptions a potential trigger for escalation, rather than a buffer against it.
Conclusion: Pragmatism over Illusion
The quest for strategic supply control is both a response to real vulnerabilities and an illusion born of the desire for certainty in an uncertain world. As the broader research shows, complete control is neither feasible nor desirable. The wiser path lies in building resilient, agile, and diversified supply networks, balancing national interests with the benefits of global interdependence. Managing dependencies is a critical but underdeveloped skill in business and government. Ultimately, the well-being of nations will depend not on fortress economies but on the ability to adapt, collaborate, and innovate in a world where supply chains are both the battleground and the bridge of our shared future.
(Reprinted from LinkedIn with permission of the Author)
References
- https://www.alex-capri.com/alex-capri-in-interview/v/cna-uncertainties-remain-as-us-china-agree-on-plan-to-reduce-trade-tensions-analyst
- https://www.alex-capri.com/alex-capri-in-interview/v/technonationalism-strategic-competition-in-the-21st-century
- https://www.mining.com/web/a-vicious-cycle-of-rising-resource-nationalism
- https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/operations/our-insights/tech-and-regionalization-bolster-supply-chains-but-complacency-looms
- https://www.xeneta.com/blog/the-biggest-global-supply-chain-risks-of-2025
- https://www.canadianminingjournal.com/featured-article/resource-nationalism-the-new-global-economic-rent/
- https://www.capgemini.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Fast-forward_Report.pdf
- https://www.sap.com/africa/resources/supply-chain-risks
- https://www.dhl.com/discover/en-id/logistics-advice/logistics-insights/geopolitical-impact-global-supply-chain-disruption
- https://unctad.org/news/transport-newsletter-article-no-110-collaboration-dependencies-in-shippinghttps:/unctad.org/news/transport-newsletter-article-no-110-collaboration-dependencies-in-shipping
About the author
Wolfgang Lehmacher
Global Supply Chain Advisor & Former Director · World Economic Forum