- March 12, 2026
- ; 09:00
- -
- March 12, 2026
- ; 10:30
How resilient is the German economic model in an era of geopolitical tensions, fragile supply chains, and an intensifying global competition for technological leadership?
This question stood at the center of the Aspen Institute Germany Deep Dive Discussion “Between Dependency and Resilience: Economic Security as a Strategic Task,” organized in partnership with the Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
A central takeaway from the discussion was that economic security is not a single concept, but operates along two interconnected dimensions.
First, the security of the economy: strengthening the resilience of economic systems themselves. This includes reducing excessive or asymmetric dependencies, diversifying supply chains, and ensuring that economies are able to absorb geopolitical shocks such as trade disruptions, sanctions, or technological restrictions.
Second, security with the economy (economic statecraft): the growing recognition that economic power itself has become a strategic instrument of foreign and security policy. In this context, tools of economic statecraft – including export controls, investment screening, industrial policy, sanctions, and regulatory power – are increasingly used to shape geopolitical outcomes and protect national interests.
Against this backdrop, the panel also assessed the current resilience of the German economy. The overall picture was rather sobering. Vulnerabilities persist across global value chains – from raw materials and energy dependencies to critical technologies and industrial ecosystems. The discussion highlighted that delayed action or policy inertia could significantly increase both economic and strategic costs over time.
At the same time, the conversation emphasized that strengthening economic security does not necessarily mean abandoning economic openness. Instead, it required a more calibrated approach to globalization, often captured by the concept of de-risking rather than decoupling: reducing critical vulnerabilities while maintaining beneficial economic interdependence.
Several areas of emerging consensus became clear:
• Less bureaucracy where regulation slows innovation and limits the adaptability of companies.
• A stronger and more strategic role for the state in safeguarding security-critical infrastructure and technologies.
• A European response to economic security, recognizing that many of the relevant tools and leverage points exist at the EU level.
Ultimately, the discussion underscored a broader structural shift: economics and security can no longer be treated as separate spheres. In an increasingly geo-economic world, resilience, innovation capacity, and technological leadership are becoming central determinants of geopolitical influence.
The discussion benefited greatly from the insights of Nora Habib-Sadek, Head of Unit “Geopolitische Analysen, internationale und europäische Wirtschaftssicherheit“ at the German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy; Prof. Dr. Julian Hinz, Director of the Trade Policy Research Group at the Kiel Institute for the World Economy and Professor at Bielefeld University; Katharina Neckel, Head of Unit „Außenwirtschaftsrecht & Handelsvereinfachungen“ at the German Chamber of Commerce and Industry (DIHK); and Anna-Lena Schütte, Deputy Head of the Berlin Public Policy Team at Infineon.
