There is a paradox in European history: even leaders of great caliber often fail to perceive the scope of structural changes as they unfold. In the 1980s, figures such as François Mitterrand, Helmut Schmidt, Helmut Kohl, and Andreas Papandreou—individuals with deep historical consciousness—faced a shift they did not immediately recognize in its entirety: the transition from state control to market liberalization and globalization.
The Lesson of the 1980s
During that era, financial markets were deregulated and capital movement restrictions receded. Mitterrand’s experience in 1981 serves as a prime example. He was elected on a platform of nationalization and social welfare expansion, only to be forced into a sharp turn toward fiscal austerity two years later, as policy freedom was increasingly constrained by international capital flows.
Similarly, Andreas Papandreou sought to heal the inequalities of an old economic model just as a new one was being born. These leaders observed individual changes but struggled to understand that together, they formed a new system that inverted the relationship between the state and the market.
The Modern Parallel
Today, we face a similar challenge. We view tariffs, protectionism, energy upheavals, and the US-China technological rivalry as isolated crises. However, these may be expressions of a single, massive shift: the return of the state to the economy as a vehicle for national power and security.
- Supply chain security now outweighs low costs.
- Energy autonomy is becoming more critical than cheap supply.
- Trade is transforming from a mechanism of efficiency into a tool of geopolitics.
Europe, built on a foundation of open markets and common rules, risks seeking solutions using the tools of yesterday. The transition from unhindered globalization toward economic resilience and geopolitical dominance is already underway, and the question remains whether European leadership will recognize it in time.
