The move toward a less efficient, more expensive global supply chain is not a failure but a strategic correction. Over-prioritizing efficiency created a dangerous dependency on China. Diversification, while costlier in the short term, is a fundamental principle of long-term risk management.

Related Insights

Politicians predictably declare initiatives for domestic production of critical goods like munitions or rare earths when dependencies are exposed. However, these declarations rarely translate into effective action, suggesting we must learn to manage economic entanglement as a form of mutual deterrence rather than wish it away.

Counterintuitively, U.S. and global auto firms need to collaborate with Chinese suppliers to reduce strategic dependency. The model involves onshoring Chinese hardware and manufacturing expertise while maintaining national control over sensitive AI software and networks, creating a strategic "co-opetition."

Twenty years ago, globalization and open markets (geopolitical tailwinds) created new opportunities for businesses. Today, rising nationalism, trade barriers, and security concerns act as headwinds, creating obstacles and increasing the complexity of international operations.

China does not oppose the migration of labor-intensive manufacturing to ASEAN countries. With an aging workforce, its strategic focus is shifting up the value chain to high-end industries like green energy. This indicates a deliberate industrial policy to cede low-cost production rather than a desire to control all levels of manufacturing.

When trade policies force allies like Canada to find new partners, it's not a temporary shift. They build new infrastructure and relationships that won't be abandoned even if the political climate changes. The trust is broken, making the economic damage long-lasting and difficult to repair.

The credit's requirements for North American manufacturing and sourcing from trade partners were designed to counter China's dominance in the EV supply chain. Its elimination undermines this strategic goal, leaving tariffs as the primary, less effective tool.

Geopolitical shifts mean a company's country of origin heavily influences its market access and tariff burdens. This "corporate nationality" creates an uneven playing field, where a business's location can instantly become a massive advantage or liability compared to competitors.

Beyond raw materials, China's national ambition is to achieve near-total self-sufficiency. The prevailing mood is that there is "nothing for which it wants to rely on foreigners a single day longer than it has to." This philosophy of aggressive import substitution signals a fundamental break with the logic of reciprocal global trade.

Globalism was highly successful, lifting millions from poverty. Its failure wasn't the concept itself, but the lack of strategic boundaries. By allowing critical supply chains (like microchips and steel) to move offshore for cost savings, nations sacrificed sovereignty and created vulnerabilities that are now causing a predictable backlash.

Anticipating that independence from China will be a long-term, bipartisan US policy goal, Rivian intentionally designed its new R2 supply chain to be U.S.-centric. This strategic planning aims to align the business with persistent geopolitical trends, rather than just reacting to current tariffs.