“Companies must prepare for a fragmented and unstable order,” stresses Général Bernard de Courrèges

In an era defined by the return of hard power, how should CEOs and strategists adapt to a world where war is no longer a distant memory but a present reality? Ahead of the ESSEC Institute for Geopolitics & Business event “Bienvenue dans la post-mondialisation : les PDG face aux nouveaux risques géopolitiques et de sécurité” (11 September 2025), we sat down with General Bernard de Courrèges, Lecturer in Strategy at ESSEC Business School and former Director of the Institut des hautes études de défense nationale (IHEDN). In this wide-ranging conversation, he warns that the post-Cold War order has given way to a “brutalization of the world,” where companies must rethink resilience, autonomy, and their role in the new economy of defense.

The post-globalization era has coincided with a return of hard security threats—from Russia’s war in Ukraine to growing tensions in the Indo-Pacific. How do you interpret this shift in the global security landscape?

Bernard de Courrèges - After three decades since the end of the Cold War and the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia, the return of war to Europe marks a turning point and the dawn of a new strategic era. Across Europe, Asia, and Africa, some nations no longer hesitate to use force and violence to advance their interests or settle disputes. The international system based on law, inherited from World War II, is now being challenged by renewed power competition and by the rejection of so-called “Western” values by a growing number of countries. This new environment must be integrated into strategic thinking—including its economic dimension.

As the UN celebrates its 80th anniversary this September, many question the effectiveness of multilateral institutions in guaranteeing peace. Do you believe they can still play a stabilizing role, or are we entering an era where companies must build resilience in a fragmented order?

B.d.C. - The ability of multilateral institutions to guarantee peace is indeed severely weakened, and their very role is being called into question. The events of recent years show that this is a deep and ongoing trend. Companies must now operate in a fragmented international order, within a less stable environment where uncertainties and risks will only grow. They must therefore reflect seriously on their agility and reassess their ability to withstand shocks.

China’s determination to bring Taiwan back into its fold raises the prospect of conflict in the Indo-Pacific. From a defense perspective, how likely is such a scenario in the near future, and how should European companies prepare for the potential disruptions?

B.d.C. - The authorities of the People’s Republic of China have consistently reaffirmed the reunification of Taiwan with mainland China under the “One China” principle. This claim has been reinforced over the years, both in rhetoric and in actions—notably through increased military exercises around the island. Nevertheless, the Chinese government takes a long-term approach. While the deployment of substantial military assets in the region makes the risk of an incident escalating ever-present, China is unlikely to provoke a major confrontation unless it is confident of prevailing. In his speeches, Xi Jinping regularly refers to 2049, the centenary of the PRC, expressing the ambition for China to become the world’s leading economic and military power by that date. In the coming years, however, the likelihood of heightened tensions in the region is very significant, which calls for great caution in trade relations and investments with China.

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, NATO allies—under U.S. pressure—have committed to major increases in defense spending. How does this rearmament of Europe reshape the strategic environment for both governments and businesses?

B.d.C. - To be respected, one must inspire fear—and therefore be powerful enough to deter any potential aggressor. The transatlantic link remains essential for Europe’s security. However, the European pillar of NATO must be strengthened, and European countries must rearm. For reasons of economic, industrial, and above all strategic autonomy, it is important to prioritize the strengthening of Europe’s own defense industry and avoid the overly systematic purchase of American equipment. This position, long advocated by France, is not shared by all European countries—some of which remain more receptive to U.S. pressure.

Defense policy is increasingly intertwined with economic strategy—from critical supply chains to technological sovereignty. How should CEOs rethink their role in this new “economy of defense”?

B.d.C. - Developing an economy geared toward wartime readiness is now a strategic objective of defense policy. This means ensuring that the French economy—industrial and state capacities alike—can meet the needs of the armed forces and internal security agencies in the event of a major extraterritorial war with consequences on national territory. This requires rebuilding certain critical stockpiles, securing and diversifying supply chains, relocating production sites to France, reorganizing to accelerate production rates through new technologies, and simplifying regulations. None of this is possible without stronger dialogue between government services and businesses.

At the ESSEC Institute for Geopolitics & Business, we have described the “brutalization of the world” as a defining trend. Do you see this brutalization reflected in defense strategy, and what lessons should corporate leaders draw from it?

B.d.C. - Military strategy requires a long-term vision. The “brutalization of the world” has been identified and integrated into recent strategic reviews (2017, 2022, 2025) and into the military programming laws. This awareness has led to a significant increase in the armed forces’ budget—especially for equipment—and a tougher approach to operational preparation for potential high-intensity confrontations. Faced with these risks and threats, the 2025 national strategic review states that strengthening national resilience is essential. The ability to withstand the consequences of an attack or major disaster, and to quickly restore functionality, requires not only state authorities but also society as a whole—including many businesses.

What assistance can be provided by government services and the academic world to help business leaders address these challenges?

B.d.C. - To remain effective strategists, business leaders must be better informed about geopolitical and security threats and their concrete consequences for their companies. This requires awareness-raising and information initiatives for management, carried out by government departments (Prime Minister’s Office, Ministries of the Interior, Defense, and Economy) responsible for economic intelligence and security at both central and regional levels. It also requires training programs such as those provided by the Institute for Higher National Defense Studies (IHEDN), with its annual national session—particularly the “Defense and Economic Security” program—as well as regional and youth sessions. Finally, this culture must be instilled as early as possible in future decision-makers through academic institutions. This need is being met by the Institute for Geopolitics & Business and by the Center for Geopolitics, Defense, and Leadership at ESSEC Business School.

ABOUT THE ESSEC INSTITUTE FOR GEOPOLITICS & BUSINESS

Created in 2024 by ESSEC, the Institute for Geopolitics & Business examines how geopolitical shocks reshape companies’ economic models.

Operating across ESSEC Business School’s campuses in France, Morocco, and Singapore, it brings a tri-continental perspective to what drives corporate competitiveness in the post-globalization era: vigilance, resilience, independence.

It feeds into ESSEC’s degree programs, executive education, and research to foster a new generation of geopolitics-proof business leaders capable of steering and growing companies amid an increasingly brutalized world.

Rooted in ESSEC’s academic excellence, the Institute draws on 4 flagship centers:

• the IRENE Center for Negotiation & Mediation,
• the Center for Geopolitics, Defense & Leadership,
• the Center for European Law & Economics, and
• the Chair Business & Industry in Africa.

Contact: Thomas FRIANG, Executive Director of the ESSEC Institute for Geopolitics & Business - friang@essec.edu