How Geopolitical Tensions Reshape Trade Patterns: Geoeconomic Fragmentation, or China’s Big Manufacturing Push?
A data-based analysis shows that widespread geoeconomic fragmentation of world trade is not visible, at least so far. In contrast, the geopolitically-motivated challenges to international coordination are striking, notably in relation with China's surging surplus in manufactured goods trade.
It has become received wisdom to consider the world economy as increasingly shaped by forces of fragmentation, resulting from geopolitical tensions and strategic competition between great powers, including through trade and industrial policies. This Ifri Paper reconsiders this narrative using international trade data. It shows that, far from being a widespread trend, geoeconomic fragmentation of trade flows is only significant in “hotspots”; that is, for Russia’s foreign trade and for China-United States bilateral exchanges. Outside these hotspots, there is no tangible sign that geopolitical tensions have been shaping international trade blocs, nor is there any hint of a trend toward nearshoring – on the contrary, in fact. There is no evidence either that competing industrial policies have been reshaping trade patterns. The clearest trend is much more specific: it is the massive surge in China’s surplus in manufactured goods trade, up to 11% of the world’s total or these products since early 2023. Sudden and common to all main directions and all main sectors, this push has been policy-driven. As economic security concerns reinforce governments’ focus on manufacturing, this has become a major challenge to international coordination.
Available in:
Themes and regions
ISBN / ISSN
Share
Download the full analysis
This page contains only a summary of our work. If you would like to have access to all the information from our research on the subject, you can download the full version in PDF format.
How Geopolitical Tensions Reshape Trade Patterns: Geoeconomic Fragmentation, or China’s Big Manufacturing Push?
Related centers and programs
Discover our other research centers and programsFind out more
Discover all our analysesNew Cold War? What New Cold War? Confronting the Geoeconomic Fragmentation Narrative with the Data
It has become widely accepted that the world economy should be seen as increasingly shaped by forces of fragmentation, resulting from geopolitical tensions. This article takes another look at this narrative, using international trade data. While an aggregate analysis is consistent with a new Cold War narrative, whereby international trade is increasingly seen as split into two blocs, this is only a mix of very different outcomes. Far from being a widespread trend, geoeconomic fragmentation of trade flows is only significant in “hotspots”: Russia's foreign trade and China-US bilateral exchanges, and the impact is massive in these cases. Outside these “hotspots”, there is no tangible sign that geopolitical tensions have been shaping international trade patterns in terms of blocs, nor is there any hint of a trend toward nearshoring – to the contrary, in fact.
Central Securities Depositories and Geopolitical Risks: Challenges for European Policy
Central Securities Depositories (CSDs) form the backbone of financial market infrastructure by registering securities, settling trades, distributing cash flows, and managing collateral. While often regarded as mere financial “plumbing,” they in fact underpin strategic objectives such as advancing the Savings and Investment Union, curbing tax evasion, and reinforcing Europe’s geopolitical stance.
Manufacturing Risk: Geopolitical Doxa and the Corporate World
The evolving power dynamics between the United States, China, and Russia are creating new geopolitical realities that businesses can no longer evade. Geopolitical risk has become unavoidable, yet many companies remain unprepared to navigate its complexities. Corporate leaders can no longer afford to overlook its implications.
Trump's Trade War: What Answers for the European Union?
The announcement, on April 2, 2025, of “reciprocal tariffs” by the United States has opened a sequence of profound break with decades of established trade policy practices, where the administration behaviour has been marked by dogmatic blindness, amateurism, and self-serving interests.