No No No – The new winners and losers in geopolitics. Part I
Paula Allen
Telstra Business Awards judge, Geopolitics and Strategy, super, tech, transformation and innovation C-level executive
Some months ago I noted that we are now in a new world. A world where we lack that overarching stability offered by a stable USA providing and enforcing ‘the rules’. This rules-based order has informed our personal and professional lives and is now permanently lost to us all. In No, No and No for example, I cited the layers of supply chains enabled by such a world. Just think about that. For example, it would have been difficult for ‘just in time’ to have come into being, with the subsequent cost to inventories, efficiency and hence capital demands. That is just one small example. It is that surety that we have now lost and, I believe, will not see again (explained in No, No and No). So, accepting that we have ‘lost’ that world, how does an unstable world work?
In weighing up this question, I have looked back at the lessons of modern times, before the period of stability commenced in the post-WW2 world. For that reason, I have chosen 1800 – 1939. Ultimately, I have settled on four key themes that drove who the winners and who were the losers of that time:
So, for now, do please provide your thoughts – do you agree with the themes, the winners and losers? I look forward to an engaging series where we can consider the lessons of history as to how they can inform us in how to prepare, plan and navigate this new geopolitical world.
A selection of recent geopolitical articles which may be of interest:
17 April 2025 Anti-fragile will prosper in a Trump world
28 March 2025 Yes, Yes and Yes
23 January 2025 Why business needs to recalibrate its views on China
16 January 2025 The new chip war, TSMC, and Donald Trump
5 December 2024 Why business should pay attention to the South East China sea
University of Sydney Finance Student | CFA Level I Candidate | Exploring the Future of Investing & Global Capital Markets
1moThank you for sharing such a sharp historical perspective. Looking at the 1800 to 1939 period, it’s clear how industrial capacity, control over trade routes, military innovation, and imperial reach shaped global power. What stands out is how success was driven less by ideology and more by the ability to scale systems whether factories, fleets, or administrative machinery. In today’s fractured landscape, it feels like we are at the beginning of a similar recalibration. But unlike the past, power may now lie less in physical empire and more in controlling standards, data networks, AI infrastructure, and supply chain chokepoints. Curious to hear your view what do you think will be the equivalent sources of geopolitical advantage in this new era?