top of page

By:

Apurva Rakesh Pandey

27 August 2024 at 9:53:07 am

From Gold to Chips: The Quiet Return of Mercantilism

Globalisation has not been abandoned but is being rewired around resilience, strategic trust and national power. Foreign Trade and Domestic Compared, by William Herbert, 1754 Economic history rarely buries its most influential ideas. It merely waits for circumstances to make them relevant again. Mercantilism is one such idea. For much of the post-Cold War era, it seemed safely confined to textbooks - a relic of a time of colonial monopolies and favourable trade balances. The triumph of...

From Gold to Chips: The Quiet Return of Mercantilism

Globalisation has not been abandoned but is being rewired around resilience, strategic trust and national power. Foreign Trade and Domestic Compared, by William Herbert, 1754 Economic history rarely buries its most influential ideas. It merely waits for circumstances to make them relevant again. Mercantilism is one such idea. For much of the post-Cold War era, it seemed safely confined to textbooks - a relic of a time of colonial monopolies and favourable trade balances. The triumph of globalization appeared to have settled the debate. Economic interdependence promised not only prosperity but also peace. Three decades later, that confidence has begun to dissolve. While the world has not abandoned globalization, it has become less certain about the assumptions on which it rested. Across the major economies, governments are reclaiming a role they once seemed willing to surrender. Washington has embraced tariffs, industrial subsidies and technology export controls. Beijing has tightened restrictions on critical minerals while accelerating technological self-reliance. The European Union increasingly frames trade through the language of economic security. Philosophical Shift The implications represent a change in the philosophy of globalization itself. If the first era of globalization was organised around efficiency, the emerging one is being organised around security. As Dani Rodrik has argued, industrial policy has returned to the centre of economic governance. Comparative advantage is steadily yielding to a new vocabulary of technological sovereignty, resilient supply chains and economic security. The defining question is no longer where production is cheapest, but where it is safest. The resemblance to mercantilism is impossible to ignore. Not because the world is returning to the seventeenth century, but because governments are once again judging commerce by the strategic capabilities it creates rather than the wealth it generates. Classical mercantilists controlled trade routes and protected monopolies. Today’s strategic states compete for semiconductors, artificial intelligence, critical minerals and technological standards. Gold has given way to chips and spices to rare earths. The pandemic exposed the fragility of supply chains built almost exclusively for efficiency. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine demonstrated how energy, food and finance could become instruments of coercion, while the freezing of Russian foreign exchange reserves revealed that even global financial networks were no longer politically neutral. At the same time, strategic rivalry between the United States and China expanded beyond tariffs into semiconductors, artificial intelligence, quantum computing and critical minerals. The geography of competition had shifted from factories to the technologies that would shape future economic and military power. Henry Farrell and Abraham Newman describe this landscape as one of “weaponized interdependence”, where states exploit their central positions within global networks to pursue geopolitical objectives. Interdependence, once celebrated as a guarantee of stability, has become a source of leverage. The lesson is that efficiency without resilience is no longer an economic virtue but a strategic vulnerability. Shaping Markets Once that vulnerability became visible, policy could hardly remain unchanged. Governments are no longer content merely to regulate markets; they are shaping them. From the CHIPS and Science Act in the United States to China’s drive for technological self-reliance and the European Union’s Economic Security Strategy, industrial policy has returned to the centre of economic governance. Japan, South Korea and Singapore have adopted similar approaches, strengthening economic-security frameworks while investing in advanced manufacturing and digital infrastructure. This is an acknowledgement that markets alone cannot guarantee national resilience. In many ways, it is mercantilism without colonies. Export controls, industrial subsidies, technology alliances and strategic stockpiles have become essential instruments of economic statecraft. Record central-bank gold purchases, reserve diversification and growing interest in local-currency settlement mechanisms reflect a broader search for financial resilience in an uncertain world. As Robert Blackwill and Jennifer Harris argue in War by Other Means, economic instruments have become as consequential to statecraft as military power itself. Yet to interpret these developments as the end of globalization would be to misunderstand the moment. The world is not ‘de-globalising;’ it is ‘re-globalising’ on strategic terms. International trade continues to expand and multinational firms remain deeply embedded in global value chains. What has changed is the organising principle. The first wave of globalization rewarded efficiency and scale; the next is likely to reward resilience, trusted partnerships and strategic diversification. Friend-shoring, near-shoring, China+1 and the shift from just-in-time to just-in-case production are not signs of globalization’s retreat but evidence that globalization is being fundamentally rewritten. Supply chains are not disappearing; they are being rewired around trust, resilience and strategic alignment. Economic openness is giving way neither to protectionism nor autarky, but to a more selective form of integration. Every transformation of the global economy reshapes the hierarchy of opportunity. The present one may prove unusually favourable to India. As multinational firms diversify production networks and governments increasingly favour trusted partners, India is well placed to emerge not merely as an alternative manufacturing destination but as a pivotal node in resilient global supply chains. Advantage India Its advantages extend beyond labour costs to a large domestic market, democratic institutions, strategic autonomy, a rapidly expanding digital economy and a central position in the Indo-Pacific. In an age where geopolitical trust has become an economic asset, these strengths constitute a strategic advantage. New Delhi’s response reflects an awareness of this shift. Rather than relying on market liberalisation alone, it has increasingly focused on building industrial capability. The Production Linked Incentive (PLI) programme across fourteen strategic sectors, together with the India Semiconductor Mission, PM Gati Shakti and the National Logistics Policy, aims to strengthen manufacturing competitiveness, logistics and technological capacity. At the same time, leadership in semiconductors, artificial intelligence, quantum technologies, biotechnology, space and clean energy is becoming central not only to economic growth but also to strategic influence. Modern mercantilism is no longer about protecting industries but about building capabilities. Industrial capability, however, cannot flourish behind closed borders. That explains New Delhi’s renewed emphasis on trade diplomacy. The Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement with the United Arab Emirates, the Economic Cooperation and Trade Agreement with Australia, and the recently concluded free trade agreements with the United Kingdom, the European Union and New Zealand, alongside negotiations with the United States and the Gulf Cooperation Council, reflect an approach best described as strategic openness. India is seeking deeper integration with global markets while preserving policy space in sectors vital to long-term resilience. The objective is to become a trusted manufacturing, technology and supply-chain partner in an increasingly fragmented global economy. That said, global manufacturers continue to point to land acquisition, regulatory complexity, logistics costs and judicial delays as obstacles to large-scale investment. Competing with established manufacturing ecosystems will require sustained reforms in infrastructure, education, research, innovation and ease of doing business. India’s emergence as a pivotal player in the next phase of globalization will ultimately depend on the consistency of these reforms. History nevertheless suggests that periods of global economic reordering often favour countries that adapt before others do. The redistribution of manufacturing after the Second World War transformed Japan, later South Korea and Taiwan, and eventually China. Today’s reconfiguration of supply chains may prove equally consequential. Countries that combine openness with resilience, innovation with industrial capability, and competitiveness with institutional credibility will shape the next chapter of globalization. India has the opportunity to be among them only if strategic ambition is matched by sustained execution. Adam Smith taught that wealth is created through markets. Kautilya understood that markets ultimately serve the interests of the state. The twenty-first century suggests that both captured part of the truth. Prosperity still depends on openness, competition and innovation, but enduring power increasingly belongs to nations capable of converting economic capability into strategic advantage. (The author is an alumnus of the University of Allahabad and a writer and analyst on international relations and strategic affairs. Views personal.)

When Hearts Suffer Alone!

AI generated image
AI generated image

Every morning, countless people leave their homes with a smile. They exchange greetings with family, go to work, attend school, or meet friends. Yet, by evening, some of them never return. When a family receives the devastating news that a loved one has died by suicide, no words can describe the pain that follows. In a single moment, laughter disappears from the home forever. A mother's tears never truly stop. A wife's dreams collapse. Children lose the comforting hand that guided them. Elderly parents are forced to witness the funeral of their own child-a sorrow no parent should ever endure.


Suicide does not claim only one life. It destroys countless dreams, breaks families apart, and leaves emotional wounds that may never heal. Behind every suicide lies a circle of grieving parents, spouses, children, siblings, friends, and colleagues whose lives are changed forever.


Today, suicide is no longer merely a matter of law, crime statistics, or public health. It has become one of the greatest challenges facing modern society-a reflection of deteriorating mental well-being, emotional isolation, and the disappearance of meaningful human connection. The long-held belief that only people facing financial hardship or academic failure die by suicide is no longer true. Increasingly, well-educated professionals, successful entrepreneurs, respected teachers, doctors, and individuals admired by society are taking this irreversible step.


Recent incidents have deeply shaken Maharashtra. A renowned cardiologist from Latur, a man who dedicated his life to saving countless patients, ended his own life. Soon after, a teacher from Hadgaon in Nanded district tragically drove his car into a river along with his two young children. Similar heartbreaking incidents have surfaced elsewhere, including Mahabaleshwar. Although each case has different circumstances, they reveal one painful reality: people are breaking from within, often without anyone noticing.


The greatest tragedy is that emotional suffering rarely has visible symptoms. People learn to hide their pain behind smiles, professional success, and social respectability. Many continue to fulfill their responsibilities while silently fighting overwhelming emotional battles. Society often mistakes silence for strength and smiles for happiness, failing to recognize the invisible wounds hidden beneath.


One of the most alarming changes in modern life is the decline of genuine communication. Families still live under the same roof, but meaningful conversations have become increasingly rare. Each member is absorbed in a mobile phone, while emotional distance continues to grow. Earlier generations openly discussed worries, disappointments, failures, and fears within the family. Today, many individuals suppress their emotions because they fear being judged, misunderstood, or seen as weak.


Thoughts such as, "What will people think?", "My reputation will suffer," or "No one will understand me," prevent people from expressing what they truly feel. This silence gradually becomes dangerous. Mental health experts consistently point out that suicide is rarely an impulsive decision. It is often the final outcome of prolonged emotional distress, depression, loneliness, anxiety, hopelessness, or unresolved psychological conflict. In many cases, individuals do not necessarily want to die-they simply want their unbearable pain to end. They hope someone will notice, listen without judgment, and remind them that they are not alone. Unfortunately, we often pay attention only to visible success while ignoring invisible suffering.


Social media has connected the world digitally but has distanced hearts emotionally. A person may have thousands of followers and hundreds of online friends, yet have no one with whom they can honestly share their fears. Constant comparison, unrealistic standards of success, fear of failure, relationship conflicts, workplace pressure, and loneliness have significantly increased emotional stress. While social media alone is not responsible for suicide, the absence of authentic human relationships and meaningful conversations certainly contributes to growing psychological distress.


Equally concerning is the stigma surrounding mental health. Society readily accepts treatment for physical illness but still hesitates when it comes to emotional suffering. Seeking help from a psychologist, counsellor, or psychiatrist is often wrongly viewed as a sign of weakness. In reality, asking for help demonstrates courage, maturity, and a commitment to protecting one's life. Mental health deserves the same importance as physical health.


Educational institutions, workplaces, and communities must actively promote emotional well-being. Schools and colleges should teach not only how to achieve success but also how to cope with failure, disappointment, rejection, and uncertainty. Parents should inquire not only about their children's marks but also about their emotional state. Employers should create supportive workplaces where stress can be discussed without fear or stigma. Friends should remain present not only during celebrations but also during moments of despair. Sometimes the warning signs are subtle. A cheerful person suddenly becomes withdrawn. Someone avoids conversations, isolates themselves, loses interest in daily activities, or repeatedly expresses hopelessness. Such changes should never be dismissed as mere mood swings. A simple conversation, genuine concern, or patient listening may become the turning point that saves a life. People experiencing emotional pain do not always seek advice. Often, they simply need someone willing to listen without criticism, interruption, or judgment.


Ultimately, suicide is never the solution to any problem. It ends one life but leaves lifelong suffering for many others. Perhaps the most important question each of us should ask today is this: **How many people around us truly have someone they can talk to without fear? Sometimes, hope does not arrive through grand solutions. It begins with a phone call, a compassionate conversation, a caring embrace, or four simple words: "I am here for you." Those words may not solve every problem-but they may save someone's life.


(The writer is Programme Officer at National Service Scheme (NSS) Dayanand College of Commerce based in Latur. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page