Clearly, the world order has changed considerably. There is an increase in armed conflicts and multilateral institutions are operating more and more difficult. European countries are being put under pressure and accused of hypocrisy, as demonstrated, for example, by the expulsion of France from the Sahel. The energy crisis, partly caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine, also underlines the dependencies of the Netherlands. New powers rise, and traditional allies change. This affects the Netherlands directly because of the great international connection. The WRR report consequently refers to three forms of fragmentation:

1. Fragmentation of poles: The US was long time the dominant power, but now five great powers are distinguished: the US, China, Russia, India and the EU. In addition, medium and regional powers play a growing role.

2. Fragmentation of tones: Geopolitical influence is no longer limited to military force. There are now multiple tones, such as energy, food, technology and finance. This creates many conflicting interests, for example between scientific cooperation and national security.

3. Fragmentation of world views: Where globalisation and global convergence have long been dominant as a world view in Europe, other ideologies such as protectionism, populism, revisionism and post-colonialism now play a greater role.

Problem analysis and exchange

With the participants we will discuss the implications for different sectors in the Netherlands. In the chemical industry, competition with China and the US leads to challenges, especially in terms of sustainability. Dutch companies must compete in this field. States compete with each other for the most favourable investment environment to attract multinationals. There is a lot of attention to defence now, but relations with the chemical industry are large. China has made great strides in green chemistry in a short time. The American Inflation Reduction Act attracts a lot of investment, forcing the EU to provide more attractive conditions for multinationals to invest here.

Knowledge security is also changing. Where in the past risk derivatives were mainly mitigated, active policies are now being pursued. Strategic autonomy is difficult to achieve and perhaps even undesirable, both economic and geopolitical. Free trade remains essential and strategic dependencies can offer opportunities. We often define dependencies negatively, but you can also use the relationships assertively. It also means influence the other way. There is a certain rational in free trade, especially as a European standardisation force you benefit from trade relations and diversify is often a better option than decoupled. We have also seen this in the energy sector. Which door you close and which one you open has direct consequences. Taking defensive measures and reducing dependencies will limit your toolbox at a later date. We have seen this in countries that have long lived with sanctions. They're going to innovate themselves. Then you lose all influence.

Strategic autonomy and resilience plays an important role in the food sector. Food is central to the stability of countries and societies. The food sector is often viewed from a defensive point of view, but dependencies can also be used. Wageningen University & Research examined with the EU food autonomy report how autonomous the EU is in the food field. Of course, there are things we cannot spare, such as phosphate, potassium and soya. It will then largely remain with an inventory. The question is then how do we wish to act on that knowledge? Weability is often translated into a risk inventory, but concrete action remains out. A broader strategic approach is needed, whereby the Netherlands not only maps out the risks related to dependencies, but also focuses on strengthening its own food supply and cooperation with reliable partners. The question is what the European desire for strategic food autonomy will mean for producers in Africa, for example.

One could supplement the 3W framework with the external weaponization: How do we act and what strategic assets do we have? Geopolitics is a Weaponization of everything. Let's go. Wageningen University & Research (WUR) and use the whole knowledge system on agriculture and ecology as asset? And for what purposes/strategy? Are we going to use ASML strategically? One problem is that we become a target. We must not only reduce our risk losses, but also assertively deal with the assets we have. In Japan they use the term indispensability. This means that we are striving to be indispensable in certain chains. With regard to food and Europe, there is a tendency to take stock of what we have to protect. That is inspired by the thought that we want to keep what we have. Instead of looking from the other side at what we really think is important and what we want to proactively bet on. What are our strategic interests and how are we going to pursue them?

The top sectors policy of the Ministry of Economic Affairs (EZ) focused for years on prosperity, and in recent years also on social missions and values. However, there is little direction in this policy, which is needed to support transitions. Why weren't we prepared to increase the power grid? High-level sector policy must be more closely aligned with geopolitical reality, with economic resilience and strategic autonomy playing a greater role. That requires direction and a long-term strategy.

The Netherlands must make choices within the so-called 3W framework: resilience, values and prosperity. The three elements are interlinked. The Netherlands cannot become completely independent, but must focus on strategic cooperation. This means that explicit choices are needed. Weability, values and prosperity no longer come to us by themselves, but we need to work on this explicitly.

The WRR report presents some recommendations.

1. Making the Netherlands geopolitically robust: Invest in knowledge about geopolitical shows and strategic sectors such as energy and technology. Strengthen national resilience without looking only through safety glasses.
2. Review Dutch commitment to multilateral cooperation: The Netherlands cannot without the EU and must play a proactive role in the reform of multilateral institutions. Building new partnerships with countries with similar interests.
3. Mobilising and working with society as a whole: Bring citizens and businesses into strategic choices. To improve communication on geopolitical developments, so that it is not seen as a "for-my-bed" show. It should also lead to an action perspective at a smaller level. Involve SMEs and large companies in policy-making, given their direct experience with international markets and the risks involved.

Falls and perspectives of action

There are some pitfalls that we mention when it comes to our response to the fragmented world order: business-as-usual, simplification and severing.

Not everything from China is bad and not everything from the US is good. The Netherlands must operate pragmatically and strategically. Deregulation is not always the solution; a sectoral and concrete dossier approach is necessary. Sometimes the control power is very helpful and forces this innovation and improvement.

We need to take outside criticism seriously, but not accept it all the time. Criticism of Europe and the Netherlands is also used strategically. We cannot stand on every charge of hypocrisy. The Netherlands must act more reliably and consistently in international relations. The idea that we attach values to trade relations is very bad. It is more productive to be honest in equal collaborations, in which we are clear about when what strategic consideration is being made. We need to get rid of that missionary mentality that we know better.

This can be done, among other things, by proactively focusing on sectors where the Netherlands can play an essential role, such as high-tech, food and renewable energy. A strategy for key industries and trade relations can be developed together with European partners and middle powers.

The participants also support the European model. We certainly should not be careless, and there is work to be done on strategic autonomy and competitiveness. But the Draghi report The future of European competitiveness also describes that productivity growth in sectors over the last 20 years has increased more Europe than in America, except for the ICT and financial sector. That is because we have a model in which there is much less monopoly. We see the socio-economic consequences and the difference with Europe clearly in the US. It's obvious to see if we can get some European affairs that we have never completed. The IMF has investigated barriers within the internal market. They thought that if you compare trade flows, the remaining barriers correspond to 45% on goods and 115% on services. If you could bring that to zero, a prosperity growth of 7 to 8% would be feasible. There are also opportunities in that we know a lot of rules and are therefore a reliable trading partner for third countries. That's something to put in the trade treaty. Mercosur is a good example of that. The Americans and the Chinese have so far been denied access to that market. We have something to offer as a European power. It is an opportunity to maintain the responsible handling of rules we know.

It is said that the discussion in the Netherlands on the distribution of finances is not conducted fairly. For years, there wasn't a penny to go to defense, and suddenly the helm turns. In other sectors such as healthcare, we can also look critically at why so much money goes there. This divisional issue could once again be raised with regard to the coherence of sectors and considerations.

We see far too little attention to the optimism, creativity and willingness to act in many areas. The Hague lacks courage and courage. This is already present in business. The communication channels between business, society and politics and governance must be open. We can learn a lot from each other, but the exchange is too thin. Under pressure everything can become liquid, but one coalition of the able and willing you can formulate at a social level.

The Netherlands is in a changing geopolitical and geoeconomic environment. The country must invest in resilience, engage in strategic cooperation and make clear choices about economic and political dependencies. This requires a long-term vision, diplomatic commitment and involvement of all sectors of society. The thinking session stressed the need for a strategy, an action perspective and a new mentality to prepare the Netherlands for the geopolitical challenges of the future. Socires FoodFIRST is committed to improving cooperation in this area.