Change Bergen Politics

For decades following the end of the Cold War, the dominant arc of world politics pointed toward hyper-globalization. Borders were expected to become increasingly porous, universal rules-based institutions were slated to replace unilateral state power, and economic integration was presumed to make traditional national identity obsolete.

That vision has given way to a starkly different reality.

Across both established Western democracies and emerging powers in the Global South, nationalism has returned as the primary driver of domestic politics, trade strategy, and foreign policy. Rather than operating as a temporary populist backlash, modern nationalism represents a fundamental structural re-ordering of world affairs—a phenomenon often described as the rise of “strategic nationalism”.

1. The Disillusionment with Hyper-Globalization

The resurgence of economic nationalism is rooted in the perceived failures of unconstrained global integration.While globalization created immense global wealth, its benefits were unevenly distributed, leaving significant segments of domestic working classes feeling economically displaced.

Hyper-Globalized Offshoring ──► Loss of Industrial Base & Job Insecurity
                                                  │
                                                  ▼
Re-Sovereignization of Markets ◄── Electoral Pressure for Protectionism

• The Decline of Market Fundamentalism: Voters and political leaders increasingly reject the idea that pure market efficiency should dictate national policy. Free trade agreements that once prioritized low consumer prices are now routinely scrutinized for their impact on domestic wages, manufacturing resilience, and industrial capacity.
• Industrial Policy and Subsidies: Governments across the globe are deploying state subsidies, localized content requirements, and aggressive tariff regimes to re-shore critical industries—ranging from steel and automotive manufacturing to high-tech hardware. Economic growth is no longer viewed strictly as a commercial exercise, but as a component of national survival.

2. The Quest for Supply Chain Sovereignty

A major catalyst behind contemporary economic nationalism is the realization that deep supply chain reliance on external powers creates acute national security vulnerabilities.Modern crises—from global pandemics and maritime shipping blockades to targeted trade embargoes—demonstrated how fragile hyper-efficient “just-in-time” supply networks truly are.

As a result, governments are replacing market efficiency with strategic autonomy and economic security:

• Resource Nationalism: Developing economies rich in transition inputs—such as lithium, nickel, cobalt, and copper—are banning raw ore exports and mandating domestic refining. States are using their geological wealth to force foreign conglomerates to invest directly in local value-addition.
• Technological Denial: Control over advanced microchips, artificial intelligence models, and quantum computing has become heavily politicized. Major powers deploy strict export controls and outward investment screening to prevent foreign rivals from accessing foundational dual-use technology.

3. The Collapse of Universal Multilateralism

Nationalism flourishes when universal international institutions fail to deliver stability or resolve conflicts. The paralysis of bodies like the United Nations Security Council and the World Trade Organization has convinced political leaders that global rules are enforced selectively, if at all.

Universal Multilateral Paralysis ──► Return to Transactional Bilateralism
                                                │
                                                ▼
Fragmented Multi-Polarity ◄── Strategic Autonomy & Regional Coalitions

When international law and global tribunals lack the authority to enforce consensus, states revert to a “rule-of-the-strong” framework. To protect national interests, leaders bypass universal institutions entirely, favoring transactional bilateral deals, regional security pacts, and minilateral coalitions (such as AUKUS or the Quad) designed for flexible, issue-specific coordination.

4. Cultural Dislocation and the Search for Identity

Beyond economics and security, the return of nationalism responds to a deep psychological and cultural backlash against rapid global homogenization.

As global borderless networks, digital media platforms, and large-scale demographic movements blurred traditional boundaries, millions of citizens experienced a loss of cultural continuity and social cohesion. Modern nationalism fulfills a profound human desire for identity, order, and belonging:

• Ontological Security:Sociologists note that national identity provides a sense of “ontological security”—a stable anchor in a world characterized by continuous economic disruption and cultural flux.
• Re-Asserting Border Control: Demands for strict border controls, enforced immigration policies, and cultural preservation have shifted from fringe political positions into mainstream political platforms across both major democracies and authoritarian states.

5. Great-Power Competition and Transactional Diplomacy

The transition from a unipolar, US-led international order to a multipolar, multi-centered world has made nationalist statecraft the baseline of diplomacy. Major powers increasingly reject ideological crusades or long-term commitments to global public goods, adopting an explicitly transactional, interest-driven approach to foreign policy.

This environment encourages middle powers and developing nations to practice strategic multi-alignment. Rather than committing to rigid geopolitical blocs, nations leverage their independent nationalist stances to negotiate favorable commercial, energy, and defense terms with competing global powers.

The New Baseline of International Relations

The return of nationalism to the center of global politics is not a temporary aberration; it is a structural realignment of the international system.

While globalization knit the world together through technology and commercial exchanges, it failed to erase the nation-state as the primary unit of political legitimacy, security, and identity. Moving forward, statecraft will no longer be defined by the pursuit of a borderless world, but by how sovereign, self-interested states manage permanent competition, protect their domestic populations, and navigate a fragmented global order.