Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has ended globalization as we know it for the past three decadeswrote on March 24 in his letter to shareholders Larry Fink, the CEOCEO of BlackRock, the largest asset management and investment company in the world.

ang decoupling of the global economy will cause businesses and governments around the world to re -evaluate their dependencies on other states and want to go home or at least approach their manufacturing and assembly activities, he thinks.

This is also the fear of thoseGlobal commercial organizationWTOaccording to which it is a fragmentation of the world economy into separate blocks.

After a few years where free trade has been weakened, by Donald Trump’s protectionism, Brexit or other trade wars, will this be the nail in the coffin of this ideology that has been around for days? of popularity in the 1990s and 2000s?

Dying today may be an ideal version of globalizationin the opinion of Michèle Rioux, professor of political science at the University of Quebec at Montreal (UQAM) and director of the Center for Studies on Integration and Globalization.

” We now see the real issues, which are regulatory issues in the market. “

Until the financial crisis in 2008, it was believed, according to Francis Fukuyama’s thesis, that reached the end of history with the victory of liberalism over communism. It is this idea that has been destroyed today, Ms. Rioux. All the problems revealed by the pandemic and war in Ukraine are problems that already exist, but have not been exacerbated.

” Perhaps we should forget the fun, relatively naive globalization. “

The current crisis actually represents a stage of departure or stagnation in this long process of opening up to the world, also thinks Mark Manger, professor at the Munk School of International Affairs and Public Policy at the University of Toronto and co -director of the Global Economic Policy Lab.

During the pandemic, people realized that almost everything was made in China and if one link in the chain broke, the whole chain would break.he explains.

” There will likely be a tendency not to de-globalize too much, but rather to diversify, in case there are supply chain problems. This does not reduce trade, but it does mean that you have suppliers in several countries instead of just one country. “

Turn to allies

A view shared by Ari Van Assche, professor in the Department of International Affairs at HEC Montréal, who also thinks we should seek diversity of supply sources.

” We rely too much on untrustworthy partners. “

This is in addition to barriers to social acceptance and reducing environmental impact, which are increasingly binding. From now on, companies will definitely want to move to countries where the relationship is easier, even if the costs are higher.

So we return to the allies (wearing a friend), rather than just the lowest supplier.

Companies will continue to move, but where they can have more control over what is happening, whether in mines or in factories. There is more risk management than we have seen beforesaid Van Assche.

” Globalization is here to stay. Businesses benefit greatly. But the risks and costs have changed. “

Essential cogs

With the invasion of Ukraine, major European manufacturers suddenly realized their reliance on wire harnesses made there. In some factories, the assembly of some car models was delayed by the war.

Clearly no one saw it comingexplains Mark Manger. They suddenly realize the weakness of their supply chains.

It is to guard against these risks that multinationals will want to build additional supply chains in safer locations, even if it increases their costs.

One cannot rely only on one company in Guangdong; it takes one in China and another in Vietnam, for exampleexplains Mark Manger.

Consumers in rich countries can afford this price increase. But for poor countries, it’s more problematic, he believes.

” We need to find a way to ensure that they can continue to import these products. And this can only be done by ensuring the free flow of international trade. “

Global governance will be defined

This is why regulation is important, Michèle Rioux says.

Globalization increases cohesion, but it also increases vulnerabilitieshe believes.

” Globalization is not just economic. It should also be political and regulatory for the global economic system. “

It is necessary, he believes, to put in place new instruments to manage new problems.

The old rules, designed for economic relations between countries, no longer work in this context where companies, states and civil society should be involved, Ms. Rioux.

If we want to avoid the scenario of national recession, somewhat like the world experienced in the 1930s and that led to World War II, we must opt ​​for a smooth liberalization, he believes, with fair trade.

Now is not the time to turn in on ourselvesmaintains in a press release Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, director general ofGlobal commercial organizationWTO.

” History teaches us that dividing the world economy into rival blocs and turning away from the poorest nations does not lead to prosperity or peace. “

Yes to teamwork, not to the dictates of multinationals

This need for regulation is crucial for another sector severely affected by the invasion of Ukraine: agriculture.

The war and sanctions against Russia have shocked global food markets, including for wheat, corn, and sunflower and palm oil. As a result, in some countries the price of bread and other staples is rising.

The consequences can be catastrophic and this is not the first time. In 2011, rising wheat prices contributed to the outbreak of the Arab spring, recalls Nicolas Bricas, researcher at the Center for International Cooperation in Agricultural Research for Development (CIRAD), in Montpellier, and holder of the Unesco Food Chair .of the world.

Over the past ten years, there have been a series of events that have cast doubt on the stability of international markets and the possibility of relying on these markets to obtain supplies.he pointed out.

There is wheat and corn, but there are also inputs, such as nitrogen fertilizers, that farmers around the world need.

The problem is that they are in a situation of total reliance on structures and systems over which they have lost control. Producers are tied hand and footMr. believes. Bricas.

According to him, the industrial food system has made it possible to increase production and feed the planet at very low prices. But we now know the damage it causes to the environment, health and society, among others.

” We played hard with comparative advantages, looking for the lowest calorie possible, but now we see costs that are not taken into account in the price we pay in the supermarket. “

In this sector as well, the transition will involve a period of instability. But protectionism and autarky are not the solution. It lies instead, believes Mr. Bricas, in the game of complementarities and regional unity on a smaller scale.