Market liberalism is dead — we need a new NATO for trade

ary·Tariffs and tradeMarket liberalism is dead — we need a new NATO for tradeBy Danijel ViševićBy Danijel Višević Danijel Višević is a General Partner at World Fund

Before co-founding World Fund, he was the Director of Communications at ject A Ventures, co-founder of Zetra ject and Krautreporter.U.S

President Donald Trump is visiting his Trump Turnberry golf course, as well as Trump International Golf Links in Aberdeenshire, during a brief visit to Scotland from July 25 to 29

Andrew Harnik/Getty ImagesFor eight decades the West, especially European nations, treated as neutral arenas governed by rules—not power

The global economy is now shaped by rivalry, coercion, and control

Trade is no longer just trade in a rules-based order, it has become part of geopolitical strategy

And this isn’t a temporary disruption

As IMF chief Kristalina Georgieva has warned, the world is fragmenting into competing blocs

The old vision of globalisation has collapsed

What seemed to be a natural setup to many in Europe was, in fact, a historical anomaly: a system built upon an American-led world order power, enforced through institutions NATO and the Bretton Woods system

That scaffolding is now shaking

The rules-based global market we took for granted is giving way to a world of weaponised interdependence

To navigate it, the West needs a new kind of alliance: a NATO for trade

Institutions the IMF, World Bank, and GATT were established to underpin global capitalism under American leadership

Security was vided by US military power, codified in NATO

So did Europe, whose post-war recovery and integration were underwritten by American guarantees

When the Cold War , the illusion that global capitalism could operate independently of geo deepened

Today, with the return of great power competition, that illusion has shattered

Economic liberalism no longer aligns with geopolitical reality

We are entering a war economy mindset—one where national security trumps price efficiency

This shift has been accelerated by two shocks: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and China’s economic rise

Germany, in particular, had bet on market logic rather than geopolitical risk

The result: an energy crisis and a mad scramble for LNG

Far away, while the West clung to free-market orthodoxy, China has spent decades building a war-ready economy

It controls the supply chains for the energy transition—and increasingly, the components of military power

Crucially, China is not afraid to use this market dominance for political ends

And its green dominance creates dependence in Europe and beyond

Recently, China imposed controls on gallium and germanium, crucial for semiconductor development worldwide

In response to this shift, U.S

National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan has openly argued for a more strategic form of capitalism, rejecting ”oversimplified” free-market models

Trade is no longer neutral

What matters is not just cost, but control. 80-year illusion over, a new paradigm emerges In summary, we are entering a new, first truly geopolitical-economic paradigm in eight decades

The comfortable post-Cold War interlude — when seemed paramount and history had supposedly — has given way to a more raw and Hobbesian environment

We must now leverage our strengths in a -eyed way

The task is to the institutions and mindsets of the 20th-century liberal order to meet the 21st-century’s more fraught reality

It also demonstrates that Europe’s decades-long dependence on the US has become a strategic vulnerability

This episode reinforces the need for Europe and others to structurally diversify our trade relationships and value chains in a world of escalating economic coercion

It must drive us to deepen partnerships beyond the transatlantic axis, without relying too heavily on China

Europe remains a wealthy, democratic, and stable region

But post-war generations have no memory of systemic disruption

We assumed liberalism was permanent

We believed “it’s the economy, stupid.” Now we’re learning that strategic power, not market price, determines outcomes

Defence is another case in point

Until recently, most NATO members underspent on their militaries

But defence industries were caught flat-footed

For decades, Europe optimised for efficiency, not endurance

The same applies to trade

Germany’s model of Wandel durch Handel—change through trade—is being rethought

Berlin is now screening Chinese investments and reducing dependence on authoritarian suppliers

Across Europe, strategic autonomy is the new watchword

But the mindset shift is only beginning

A NATO for trade: the strategic task ahead Market liberalism assumed that trade would bring peace

But today, trade is a tool of leverage

The new mantra must be resilience—including building domestic capacity, even if it’s more expensive

This is not a temporary adjustment

And this new era demands new institutions

Just as NATO was built to defend d security, the West now needs a strategic alliance to defend d economic sovereignty—a NATO for trade—including nations Japan, South Korea and Australia

Economic security must become a d goal, not just a national one

The US has already taken steps, with domestic investments in chips and clean , and bans on key exports to China

Now, the EU is ing suit, with the Chips Act and Critical Raw Materials Act

These are necessary but insufficient measures

We must build an economic coalition of the willing, now

That means d investments, aligned trade rules, and collective tection of critical supply chains

It means accepting higher costs to safeguard long-term freedom

Cheap goods are not cheap if they make us dependent on hostile powers and geopolitical power games

The task is not to retreat from global trade, but to rebuild it on strategic terms

The free market cannot defend itself. peace, it must be tected through alliances

Economic liberalism’s end, strategy’s return Market liberalism is dead

It died when we stopped believing trade was just price

It died when supply chains became battlegrounds

And it died when autocracies weaponised interdependence while democracies hesitated

If we want to preserve sperity, we must be willing to defend it—not just with tanks, but with treaties, tariffs, and trusted partners

A NATO for trade is not a metaphor

It is the next necessary institution in a world where commerce is no longer safe from

If the West can build it, the collapse of market liberalism need not mean decline; it can be the start of a more resilient and secure economic order

Explore this year's list.