Economic security policy is undergoing a fundamental shift as corporate leaders across telecommunications, energy, and critical infrastructure face a surge in industrial espionage and cyberattacks. State services recorded approximately 750 economic security alerts in 2025, marking a threefold increase compared to 2020. Officials attribute the dramatic rise to increasingly frequent, complex, and aggressive interference aimed at exploiting national supply chain dependencies.
The Shift to Post-Globalization and Supply Chain Vulnerabilities
For decades, global value chains prioritized operational efficiency and profit margins over supply chain resilience. Companies relied on specialized suppliers, lean manufacturing, and concentrated global markets to drive down costs. However, actors have increasingly weaponized these interdependencies. Critical energy supplies, specialized technological components, and single-source financing mechanisms now serve as vectors for geopolitical coercion.
Capital takeovers remain the single largest threat vector, accounting for 60% of all reported alerts. Beyond corporate buyouts, economic warfare manifests through industrial espionage, the acquisition of sensitive technological know-how, the poaching of top scientific talent, sophisticated cyberattacks, information manipulation, and the weaponization of legal frameworks. These tactics target structural vulnerabilities embedded within modern international trade.
New Government Doctrine and Corporate Responsibility
During the inaugural Assises de la sécurité économique held in Bercy, government officials introduced a modernized security doctrine designed to expand the perimeter of national defense beyond the traditional industrial and technological base. While state agencies maintain powerful intelligence and counter-interference tools—such as foreign investment screening mechanisms—authorities emphasized that public administration cannot unilaterally map private supply chains or evaluate commercial risk.
To bridge this gap between public oversight and private action, the Essec Business School has partnered with the Ministry of Economy to launch a dedicated economic security observatory. This initiative aims to help corporate boards, risk committees, and executive teams rigorously assess third-party vulnerabilities, including the legal jurisdictions governing external audit firms and financial partners.
Rethinking Alliance Geopolitics and Transatlantic Pressures
Corporate risk assessments increasingly account for shifting geopolitical alignments. According to the second edition of the Essec Geopolitics & Business Barometer, released via L’Express, 30% of surveyed French executives identify the United States under Donald Trump as a primary threat to European economic security. Thomas Friang, executive director of the Essec Geopolitics & Business Institute, noted that this perspective reflects growing tension within transatlantic commercial relations.
Trade policies implemented by Washington have frequently extended beyond tariff adjustments to pressure European energy dependence and capture capital flows to support the domestic U.S. economy. This dynamic highlights a critical strategic reality noted by policymakers: traditional military alliances do not automatically insulate nations from economic predation, requiring companies to evaluate security risks independently of diplomatic partnerships.
The Necessity of a Coordinated European Response
National defensive measures alone cannot neutralize modern economic warfare. The European Commission has advanced a comprehensive European economic security strategy designed to reduce critical technological dependencies and counter foreign coercion. Policymakers maintain that the success of this framework depends on closely aligning foreign policy, industrial strategy, and corporate risk management to match the sophisticated tactics employed by global competitors.
)
