Quality infrastructure in a fragmenting world order

Our resilience, prosperity and values are under pressure in a world order that is visibly shifting. Drawing on scientific research, Haroon Sheikh maps out this complex interplay of forces. As a researcher at the Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR), he co-authored the report ‘The Netherlands in a Fragmenting World Order’, a guide for the major policy choices facing our country. This also gives the TIC sector a more strategic dimension. ‘We are used to the world moving our way. That is no longer the case.’

According to Sheikh, we intuitively sense that something is changing fundamentally. ‘We notice the tensions and uncertainty, but it’s difficult to put that feeling into words.’ The 2024 WRR report does just that, using three key concepts: resilience, prosperity and values.

For a long time, these three reinforced one another: since the fall of the Berlin Wall, economic growth has brought with it security and the spread of democratic values. ‘Those days are behind us,’ says Sheikh. ‘The 3 concepts are under pressure.’ War on the European continent, friction in trade relations, democracy under strain worldwide: the sense of inevitability has vanished.

The WRR introduces a clear analytical framework that provides guidance for the Netherlands on the international stage:

• • Resilience: security and protection against external shocks, resilience and preparedness
  • Prosperity: earning capacity, the free market, economic strength and standard of living
  • Values: the rule of law, democracy and fundamental freedoms

A persistent belief in Europe is that the world will naturally align itself with our standards and interests, he continues. ‘We still cling somewhat to the idea that what we want will eventually come to pass. That other countries are waiting for our deals, on our terms. That’s no longer how it works.’

The United States no longer guarantees our security, China reacts sharply to European economic interventions, and countries in South America and Asia are not necessarily dependent on Europe as a trading partner. ‘We must get used to the fact that it costs us something to maintain our position. Financially, but also in terms of our willingness to take others seriously.’

The price of resilience

The WRR framework of resilience, prosperity and values highlights where the tensions lie. Resilience has been neglected in recent decades, Sheikh says. ‘We have focused heavily on prosperity and values. Now we need to invest much more in security and strategic autonomy.’

That shift is causing friction. Wanting to be less dependent on Russian gas means new dependencies on other countries. Less dependence on Chinese medicines makes products more expensive. Less dependence on American technology requires our own investments. ‘Greater resilience has consequences for prosperity. And sometimes for values too. Take the debate surrounding AI data centres or energy-intensive industry: if you want to build strategic infrastructure, sustainability goals quickly come under pressure.’

Although Europe is economically strong, it is politically and militarily vulnerable. In a world with five power centres – the US, China, the EU, Russia and India – the EU is, according to Sheikh, ‘an unbalanced power’. ‘Russia is militarily dangerous, but economically relatively weak. Europe is an economic giant, but geopolitically cautious. We often play the game that others impose on us.’

According to Sheikh, Europe should therefore adopt a less reactive stance. This calls for more strategic thinking about trade, industry and technology: if other countries operate on a transactional basis, we must be able to do so too. And we must not be naïve about power dynamics.

At the same time, he also sees a strength in Europe: the ability to organise rules and cooperation in a sustainable way. ‘We’ve been doing that since the nineteenth century, long before the European Union even existed.’

The weaponisation of interdependence

We can make clever use of that experience now that the exercise of power has long since ceased to be limited to the military sphere, says Sheikh. ‘We are seeing the weaponisation of interdependence. What once served primarily to stabilise is now being used to exert pressure.’ This is evident in energy and gas, food chains and rare earth elements, but also in ports, pipelines, telecoms networks and cloud services.

And in the TIC sector. For instance, with its Standards 2035 strategy, China is explicitly aiming for leadership in international standardisation bodies. ‘If your technical standard becomes the global norm, your companies have a structural advantage.’ A standard for smart cameras determines which data is stored. A telecoms standard influences privacy and security architecture. ‘Making products is one thing. Coming up with new products is already more influential. But if you set the standard, you define the playing field. Whoever sets the standards organises power.’

In this context, accreditation and conformity assessment take on a different significance. They have become more than just quality tools: they form part of the geopolitical infrastructure. ‘Behind every international trade transaction lies a web of rules, inspections and certificates. That is what makes trust possible.’ Without mutual recognition of standards, trade grinds to a halt. Without reliable testing and inspection systems, products lose their legitimacy.

‘Drinking water, energy, digital infrastructure – many institutions are at their strongest when you don’t notice them,’ says Sheikh. ‘The better they work, the less aware you are of them.’

Consumer confidence under pressure

Yet, in an age of disinformation, this invisibility can also be vulerable. And, as the WRR report notes, public confidence in vital public services is visibly declining. Deepfakes, conspiracy theories and fake news fuel this mistrust, even when systems are actually functioning well. According to Sheikh, Europe has an advantage here. ‘We know how to harmonize differences in standards. We have decades of experience in this. In a fragmented world order, that can be a strategic asset.’

Whether the ICT sector should therefore operate in a more ‘political’ manner remains to be seen. The strength of the system lies precisely in its independence and technical professionalism. ‘But at a time when direct regulation quickly leads to political conflicts, this sector can certainly have a stabilising effect behind the scenes. It helps when an authoritative body indicates what is reliable and what is not.’

Transparency can therefore help to restore trust, provided it is accompanied by clear explanations. ‘People often underestimate how complex and meticulously these kinds of systems are constructed. That story could certainly be told more often.’

The WRR report does not offer ready-made solutions to the challenges facing our country. ‘We provide a framework for thinking. Political choices remain political choices.’ The government responds formally to the recommendations; some are adopted, others are not. Sometimes ideas only gain traction later, when circumstances change.

One thing is certain: the tensions between resilience, prosperity and values will not simply disappear. And broader strategic interests also have a direct and structural impact on standards, infrastructure and quality assurance. ‘It requires constantly re-evaluating the balance. It demands ongoing reflection.’