In the global economy, goods and services are no longer the only items on the table. Some products are easily shared like slices of pizza, while others, like the queen in chess, wield strategic power in both offense and defense. Whoever wields this power can turn the tide of the game in their favor. This is why the concept of "geoeconomics" has become more common in recent years: trade is now a tool not only for creating prosperity but also for establishing geopolitical dominance.
The chip war between the US and China is one of the most striking examples of this. The US, declaring "high technology is my red line," is limiting China's access to chips. TSMC in Taiwan, whose share of global production is approaching 60%, is seen as the oil well of the 21st century. Here, not only production advantages but also direct government interventions are decisive. Trade still creates prosperity, yes, but it also provides a new trump card in international relations.
Energy markets are also one of the most dynamic areas of geoeconomics. Russia's message to Europe that it would "turn off the tap" has transformed natural gas into a tool of pressure. While rising prices in favor of producers provides short-term gains for exporting countries, the same development creates a significant problem for consuming countries. Europe's rapid shift toward alternative energy sources demonstrates that trade is no longer solely driven by cost advantages but also by security concerns.
A similar transformation is taking place in the digital sphere. The European Union's regulations and digital service taxes targeting technology giants have made data flows and digital services strategic elements of trade. The issue is no longer just competition or efficiency; control and security of information flow are also integral parts of this game. Like watching a chess tournament, a different piece emerges with each move: one day energy, the next day data, the next day chips…
All these developments do not eliminate the essence of international trade; countries still benefit mutually, and, as Ricardo suggested, prosperity is created in many areas. But the added geopolitical layer makes trade a more complex, exciting, and simultaneously riskier game. Chips, energy, rare minerals, and data flows no longer carry just economic value; they're also becoming political leverage. Perhaps the question today is: If a chip now outweighs a barrel of oil, is trading simply a matter of numbers, or is strategy an integral part of the game?
