Battery Manufacturing | ©https:// www.porsche-consulting.com/de/de/publikation/battery-manufacturing-2030-hype-hard-truths The study 'Battery Manufacturing 2030+: From Hype to Hard Truths', jointly conducted by Porsche Consulting, VDMA, Agora Strategy, and Fraunhofer ISI, provides a strategic reassessment of the global battery industry amid shifting market dynamics. Building on the earlier “Battery Manufacturing 2030: Collaborating at Warp Speed”  report, it highlights how the once-booming gigafactory expansion has entered a phase of slower, more uncertain growth. Executive Summary Gigafactory momentum is slowing, but the battery market continues to grow. Funding and industrialization risks threaten announced capacities in Europe and North America. Geopolitical fragmentation is reshaping the battery value chain. Regionalization, resource nationalism, and tech decoupling demand localized strategies and policy alignment for industrial resilience. Asian suppliers lead the battery equipment market, powering 90 percent of the first gigafactories. Newcomers are shifting from turnkey to cherry-picking single-process tools. The battery equipment market is expected to reach a cumulative value of € 250–280 billion by 2035, driven by rising demand, new gigafactories, factory upgrades, and tech integration needs. Success for equipment makers lies in specialization, alliances, and process know-how. Policymakers must back R&D, geopolitical risk management, and Europefocused funding criteria. Download der Studie:

Energie als Machtfaktor Download des Reports: Zusammenfassung Europa  ist einer der weltweit größten Netto-Importeure fossiler Energieträger . Es ist damit weiterhin anfällig für geopolitisch motivierte Lieferunterbrechungen oder Preisschocks. Europas Energiesicherheit ist auch nach dem Ende ihrer Abhängigkeit von russischem Öl und Gas neuen geopolitischen Risiken ausgesetzt. Grund hierfür sind die starken Verschiebungen auf den weiterhin dominanten fossilen Brennstoffmärkten. Insbesondere beim Erdgas ergeben sich durch die Exponierung im von den Vereinigten Staaten, Katar und Australien dominierten Flüssiggasmarkt neue Risiken . Auch erneuerbare Energien  sind durch den Zugang zu den für ihre Nutzung erforderlichen Zukunftstechnologien zum Spielball geoökonomischer Faktoren  geworden. Dies kann ihre Kostendegression verlangsamen, wenn nicht gefährden, mit negativen Auswirkungen für die erhofften langfristig positiven Preiseffekte des Umbaus des Energiesystems. Infolge von Chinas Dominanz bei Clean Tech droht Europa der Verlust heimischer technologischer Fähigkeiten. Bei Wasserstoff , einem zentralen Baustein einer CO 2 -neutralen Industrie, zeichnet sich ein konflikthafter Wettlauf um globale Standardsetzung  ab. Zugleich droht eine Verlagerung von Produktion in Regionen mit hohen erneuerbaren Energie-Ressourcen und niedrigen Kosten. Dies bringt etablierte Industrieländer unter Druck und kann zu protektionistischen Reflexen führen. Europas Energieversorgung  ist zunehmend hybriden Bedrohungen  ausgesetzt. Diese reichen von Cyberangriffen auf dezentrale Energiesysteme über Backdoor-Applikationen in erneuerbare Energie-Anlagen bis zu physischer Sabotage maritimer Infrastruktur. Zudem haben US-amerikanische Cloud-Dienstleister eine dominante Stellung im europäischen Energiesystem erlangt, während Lieferkettenrisiken bei kritischen Rohstoffen die heimische Bereitstellung sauberer Energietechnologien und damit die europäische Energiesicherheit infrage stellen.  Für Unternehmen bedeutet dies, die Sensibilisierung für geoökonomische Risiken in ihren Entscheidungen zu erhöhen. Sie müssen ein immer stärker (sicherheits-)politisch aufgeladenes Marktumfeld antizipieren und sektorale Strategien und Allianzen entwickeln, um diesen zu begegnen. Neben der Kostenkalkulation müssen Governance und Nachhaltigkeitskriterien in Zuliefererentscheidungen einbezogen werden. Auch müssen Firmen Redundanzen schaffen, Abhängigkeiten von einzelnen Daten- und Digitaldienstleistern vermeiden und Investitionen in Cybersicherheit auch als Investitionen in Energiesicherheit begreifen. Handlungsempfehlungen für Unternehmen finden Sie im Report (Download siehe oben)

In dem Agora Strategy Group Geopolitik-Podcast „The Future of Power“, lädt Dr. Timo Blenk (CEO) monatlich Entscheidungsträger aus Diplomatie, Wirtschaft, Politik und Militär ein, um aktuelle geopolitische Entwicklungen zu diskutieren. Über die Einflüsse dieser zu informieren und fundierte Entscheidungsgrundlagen zu schaffen, ist der Kern dieses Projekts. Diesen Monat zu Gast ist Dr. Manfred Knof, erfahrener deutscher Manager, Finanzexperte und Senior Advisor bei Agora Strategy! In der 35. Folge unseres Podcasts sprechen Dr. Blenk und Dr. Knof über die aktuelle Lage des Finanzsektors, den Einfluss von Zukunftstechnologien und den Standort Deutschland!   Sie finden unseren Podcast mit Untertiteln auch auf Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MH0CcU0PKY Die wichtigsten Themen des Monats Geofinance: Notenbanken, Reservewährungen und Stablecoins unter der Lupe Banking der Zukunft: Dezentralized Finance, neue Assetklassen und KI  Chancen nutzen: Kapitalmarktunion, digitale Identität und digitaler Euro als Wachstumsmotoren     Hausmitteilungen   Alle weiteren Folgen des Podcasts Agora Strategy Webauftritt Agora Strategy bei LinkedIn Aktuelle Projekte & Veranstaltungen des Agora-Strategy-Teams Agora Strategy Institute Executive Mitgliedschaft Agora Strategy Commentary: From Critical to Stable to Innovative: How Stablecoins Are Redefining Global Financial Power Agora Essential Reads: "Politische Zeitenwende" mit Lena Schorlemer Agora Strategy Special Report: The strategic role of space and Europe's answer

Prof. Dr. Kai Andrejewski, Senior Partner A Shifting Geopolitical Order The world economy is entering a new phase of structural volatility. The unipolar order of the post-Cold War era has fractured into a multipolar landscape marked by rival economic blocs, fiscal fragility, and rising policy divergence. Globalization, once a driver of growth and efficiency, is giving way to fragmentation and protectionism. The intersection of geopolitics, ESG, finance, and technology has become the defining arena of competition. Europe exemplifies the challenge. The constant collapsing of governments in France in 2025 underscores how political instability can quickly translate into fiscal uncertainty. France’s national debt has climbed to €3.4 trillion—115.6% of GDP—by late 2025, with debt service expected to hit €66 billion by 2026, becoming the country’s single largest budget item. Meanwhile, investment levels have fallen for six consecutive years. These dynamics heighten fears that Europe’s second-largest economy could become the epicenter of a renewed Eurozone debt crisis, undermining confidence in the euro and complicating monetary coordination. Across Europe, rising public deficits, populist politics, and monetary fatigue are converging into a dangerous feedback loop. Fiscal tightening risks political backlash; fiscal expansion risks market punishment. The region’s financial system, once a pillar of global stability, now appears vulnerable to shocks from both within and without. America’s Strategic Recalibration Across the Atlantic, the United States is pursuing a deliberate repositioning of its economic power. After decades of serving as the consumer and financier of last resort—absorbing global surpluses through its twin deficits—Washington is signaling fatigue with that role. The U.S. government argues it has borne disproportionate costs for maintaining the world’s liquidity and financial stability. A framework known as the Mar-a-Lago Accord, outlined by Stephen Miran, Chair of the Council of Economic Advisors, reflects this shift. The plan emphasizes a weaker dollar, selective treatment of foreign Treasury holders based on duration and yield, and a willingness to use America’s fiscal and monetary reach as a strategic instrument rather than a public good. In effect, the U.S. aims to weaponize its balance sheet—using access to its currency, markets, and debt as levers of influence. This represents a subtle but profound transformation: from a provider of global liquidity to an architect of global leverage. It reasserts financial dominance while distributing the costs of that dominance more selectively. Stablecoins: Financial Innovation Meets Statecraft Within this evolving strategy, stablecoins have emerged as one of the most consequential innovations in modern finance. These digital tokens pegged to real-world assets—primarily the U.S. dollar or gold—combine technological efficiency with monetary reliability, enabling near-instant, low-cost cross-border transactions. The passage of the GENIUS Act in July 2025 marked a turning point. For the first time, the United States established a comprehensive federal framework for stablecoins, requiring full backing by dollars or U.S. Treasuries, monthly audits, and unified state-federal oversight. The implications extend well beyond the digital-asset industry. By tying stablecoin issuance directly to U.S. government debt, the Act effectively links digital finance to the strength of the U.S. fiscal system. In doing so, it reinforces the dollar’s role as the world’s reserve currency. Today, roughly 99% of all stablecoins by market capitalization are pegged to the U.S. dollar. Under the new framework, each coin represents not only a claim on digital liquidity but also a micro-investment in U.S. sovereign debt. The geopolitical logic is straightforward: the more the world uses dollar-backed stablecoins, the greater the demand for U.S. Treasuries—and, by extension, for the dollar itself. By mid-2025, stablecoin issuers held $182 billion in Treasuries, with Tether alone controlling over $105 billion directly and another $21 billion indirectly. These entities now rank among the top 20 foreign holders of U.S. government debt, sitting alongside Japan and China. The United States has, in effect, discovered a new, decentralized mechanism for financing its deficits—a digital extension of its global monetary hegemony. The Dollar’s Digital Reinforcement The geopolitical implications are immense. The GENIUS Act not only stabilizes the regulatory environment for digital finance; it 'locks in' U.S. dominance in the crypto-asset ecosystem, ensuring that most global digital transactions continue to orbit around the dollar. As White House 'Crypto Czar' David Sacks remarked, the Act will 'extend U.S. dollar dominance globally' by aligning innovation with state power. Over time, this alignment could turn stablecoins into a strategic chokepoint. The U.S. might restrict access to its regulated stablecoins to allies or make participation conditional on compliance with its sanctions and trade regimes. In the energy sector, for example, Washington could encourage or pressure producers such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar to denominate exports in U.S.-backed stablecoins, digitizing the petrodollar system and extending American leverage into the blockchain era. Risks Beneath the Surface Yet the same forces that strengthen U.S. influence also introduce new vulnerabilities. If stablecoins become major holders of U.S. Treasuries, a sudden loss of confidence in bond markets could trigger forced liquidations, creating a self-reinforcing sell-off—a 'digital fire sale'. Moreover, as stablecoin issuers typically hold long-term assets against short-term redemption liabilities, the structure resembles the maturity mismatch that felled Lehman Brothers. There are also macroeconomic side effects. Expanding stablecoin issuance increases global demand for short-term U.S. debt, potentially altering yield-curve dynamics and reducing the Federal Reserve’s ability to manage liquidity through traditional channels. In extreme cases, this could amplify monetary volatility, blurring the boundary between regulated finance and decentralized markets. Corporate Implications: Navigating the Digital Dollar Order For global corporations, the rise of regulated stablecoins is not an abstract macro story—it is a strategic inflection point. The GENIUS Act provides long-sought regulatory clarity, opening opportunities for faster, cheaper, and more secure cross-border payments. Companies operating across multiple jurisdictions can expect lower settlement friction, improved transparency, and enhanced liquidity management. However, these benefits come with new compliance and geopolitical challenges. The U.S. framework effectively sets the global standard. Firms dealing in stablecoins must therefore ensure full alignment with U.S. financial, data-protection, and sanctions laws—even if headquartered elsewhere. The line between financial regulation and foreign policy is increasingly blurred. To adapt, companies should: 1. Audit their exposure to digital assets—review how stablecoins intersect with payment, treasury, and financing operations. 2. Integrate geopolitical risk analysis into financial planning, recognizing that access to certain digital currencies may depend on political alignment. 3. Diversify settlement systems to avoid over-reliance on a single currency or jurisdiction. 4. Invest in compliance and digital-finance capabilities, particularly in AML/CFT, data governance, and blockchain auditing. 5. Engage proactively with regulators and industry bodies to shape standards before they harden into global norms. In this new era, financial agility becomes a form of geopolitical resilience. Corporations that can adapt to regulatory shifts, manage digital liquidity, and align innovation with compliance will be best positioned to thrive. The Strategic Value of Stability Stablecoins illustrate a broader truth about today’s global economy: stability itself has become a strategic asset. What began as a niche experiment in cryptocurrency now sits at the crossroads of monetary policy, technological innovation, and national strategy. The U.S. has seized the moment to reassert monetary leadership through innovation, while Europe grapples with structural debt and institutional inertia. China, meanwhile, continues to expand its digital yuan framework—offering an alternative model rooted in state control rather than market trust. The competition between these systems will define the next decade of global finance. For the corporate sector, the message is clear. The boundaries between technology, ESG, finance, and geopolitics are dissolving. Companies must think not only about profitability but also about sovereignty, compliance, and systemic interdependence. As digital currencies become instruments of power, strategic foresight and adaptability will separate the resilient from the exposed. In the emerging order, innovation without stability breeds fragility—but stability without innovation breeds irrelevance. The challenge, and the opportunity, lie in mastering both.

In dem Agora Strategy Group Geopolitik-Podcast „The Future of Power“, lädt Dr. Timo Blenk (CEO) monatlich Entscheidungsträger aus Diplomatie, Wirtschaft, Politik und Militär ein, um aktuelle geopolitische Entwicklungen zu diskutieren. Über die Einflüsse dieser zu informieren und fundierte Entscheidungsgrundlagen zu schaffen, ist der Kern dieses Projekts. Diesen Monat zu Gast ist Susanne Wiegand, erfahrene deutsche Managerin, Rüstungsindustrie Expertin und Mitglied des Aufsichtsrates der Volkswagen Group! In der 34. Folge unseres Podcasts sprechen Dr. Blenk und Susanne Wiegand über die Transformation der deutschen Industrie, die Zeitenwende und Zukunftsmärkte!   Sie finden unseren Podcast mit Untertiteln auch auf Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkzxmtZhIjU&list=PLbZnFG9qqYIBOFIkiSxzf5d7KiaN7QDtE Die wichtigsten Themen des Monats Zukunftsstandort Deutschland: Strukturelle Veränderungen, Bürokratieabbau und Innovation als Schlüssel Rüstungsindustrie 2.0: Tempo, Luftverteidigung und Skalierung im Fokus Chancen erkennen: Indiens digitale Dynamik und vertiefte Partnerschaften mit Kanada, den Nordics und Japan     Hausmitteilungen   Alle weiteren Folgen des Podcasts Agora Strategy Webauftritt Agora Strategy bei LinkedIn Aktuelle Projekte & Veranstaltungen des Agora-Strategy-Teams Agora Strategy Institute Executive Mitgliedschaft Agora Strategy Executive Briefing: La France, inquiète: Macron has only one year to secure his economic and European legacy Agora Strategy Special Report: The strategic role of space and Europe's answer Agora Essential Reads: "From Strategy to Action - Implementing the EU Black Sea Strategic Approach"

Agora Strategy Executive Briefing on France Executive Summary The fall of the Bayrou-government in September signals that France will remain politically unstable at least until the 2027 presidential election. During this period, the inability of the political center to agree on reforms makes a deterioration in economic conditions and an intensification of the debt crisis likely. A victory of the far-right Rassemblement National (RN) in the 2027 presidential election would be a tipping point for the EU and the European integration process. Implications for International Business Companies already invested in France or planning on doing so should prepare for an end of Macron's pro-European and business-friendly policies, as an RN win in 2027 would most likely imply a nationalist agenda with protectionist policies. While the debt crisis is increasingly viral and austerity measures loom, demands on the political left are becoming more radical. Violent protests cannot be ruled out in the coming months, increasing instability and political risk in France. State of Play Macron’s grip on France’s political system is loosening In September, President Macron appointed Sébastien Lecornu as the fifth prime minister since he started his second presidential term in 2022. Governments have been changing rapidly after the president’s party, and its allies lost their majority in Parliament in 2022. Since only 15% of French voters think positively of Macron today, the president lacks legitimacy to counter the loss of confidence in the political establishment. Numerous politicians, particularly right of center, are preparing for his succession in 2027 when a term limit kicks. The ongoing instability will likely benefit forces at the political extremes and especially Marine Le Pen’s RN. The next test of the political balance of power is programmed for March 2026 with the nationwide local elections. Key Issues Inability to reform makes radical solutions more likely The last two prime ministers, Francois Bayrou and Michel Barnier, both toppled over budget plans. In view of rising deficits, French politicians, especially those on the center-right, have for decades called for greater budgetary discipline without implementing corresponding savings plans or reforms. French sovereign debt keeps climbing up after the deficit rose by an extraordinary 5,8% of GDP in 2024. That same year, the European Commission launched an excessive deficit procedure, expecting France to meet the Eurozone’s Maastricht criteria again in 2029. The procedure reflects growing concerns about the stability of the eurozone. Some observers have likened France's financial situation to that of Greece during the sovereign debt crisis. Unsurprisingly, days after the fall of the Bayrou government, Fitch Ratings downgraded the government's credit rating from AA- to A+, as analysts do not trust the French to comply with eurozone rules and austerity plans and cut new borrowing. France’s debt problem extends beyond successive governments’ inability to rein in the deficit. New debt has been taken on in recent years to mitigate economic consequences of exterior shocks. Facing the lockdowns during the COVID pandemic, Macron promised to do “whatever it takes” to protect French households from rising living costs and economic instability. Similar dynamics were at play during the energy crisis following Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Significant parts of the deficit thus indirectly benefited all French citizens alike. Yet, while new Prime Minister Lecornu has launched negotiations for the 2026 budget, responses to the national debt-problem vary significantly across the political spectrum. The French left seeks to tax large fortunes much higher to increase fiscal justice, with one key proposal made by UC Berkeley economist and director of the Paris-based EU Tax Observatory, Gabriel Zucman. Opponents on the right fear that the “Zucman-tax” will drive away investment and entrepreneurs and undo the positive momentum that Macron’s supply-oriented policies have created since 2017. The far right, for its part, is calling for radical cuts in specific areas of public spending: French transfers to the EU are to be reduced, international development aid is to be reviewed. Although their economic plans have become less radical (like “Frexit”) and more coherent, a RN-led government would add another €14bn to the French deficit without credible growth reforms. France's borrowing costs already match those of Italy and RN economic policies would deepen investor mistrust, further raise borrowing costs, and erode the country's competitiveness in the Eurozone. In addition, leading politicians (including Macron and Bayrou before his demise) have promised referendums. Also, the RN claims to be in favour of more direct democracy, a key demand of the Yellow Vest movement of 2018/19: The party wants a referendum on restricting social welfare benefits for people without French citizenship or residence rights – a potentially devastating signal for international professionals and investors. Continued instability weakens foreign policy capabilities and European unity For a long time, French politics appeared relatively stable, not least because of the president’s constitutionally granted exclusive powers, in particular in foreign and security policy. Macron’s unchallenged role in foreign affairs, however, belies the fact that France is far from consensual even in these policy areas. One telling example of the growing influence of domestic politics on France’s international policies is the EU-Mercosur free trade agreement. Farmers' associations have announced protests against the deal for the coming weeks, while the European Commission and many member states would like to adopt it as quickly as possible. Any concession at EU level would now come at a high price for Macron. Another example is the noticeable strengthening of nationalist positions in the defense industry. Aircraft manufacturer Dassault, which successfully tapped into export markets in recent years (France was the world's second-largest arms exporter in 2024), is pushing to carry out major future projects at national level and is willing to break with European partners such as Germany and Spain (within the framework of the Future Combat Air System, FCAS). This new mood in Paris could undermine confidence in France's willingness to contribute to security on NATO's eastern flank (currently mainly in Romania and the Baltic states). Instead, nationalist forces may seek to reverse Macron's shift in priorities in terms of France's global presence - from the Global South toward Europe - and resume involvement in its old ‘spheres of influence’ in West and Central Africa, the Middle East, and even the Pacific - at the expense of its European commitments.   As in other countries, parties on the political fringes primarily focus on domestic policy issues such as migration and social justice. However, this does not mean that, for example, the RN’s rise to power would not cause massive disruptions in foreign and European policy. After an electoral victory, a referendum on immigration would challenge European institutions like the Commission or the EU’s courts, with the party exploiting the subsequent clashes in line with its sovereigntist agenda. While the party has given up on earlier calls for withdrawal from the EU or NATO to not scare off potential voters in the French middle class, it would still rattle those institutions. That said, it also promised continuity in foreign policy to allay the concerns of French business associations such as Medef.   Still, the surge in support for the RN from the MAGA movement, seeking to strengthen right-wing populists across Europe, means that the 2027 presidential election could be decisive for the future of the entire EU. In late May, representatives of the Heritage Foundation met with RN leaders in Paris. The French far right is seeking American support in the upcoming presidential election; some dream of a French equivalent to “Project 2025.” If France falls to the hard right in 2027, it could trigger a domino effect in Europe and end the European unification process in its current form.

Dr. Timo Blenk ist ausgewiesener Experte für Geo- und Sicherheitspolitik. Seit 2018 ist Timo Blenk CEO und Partner der Agora Strategy Group. Agora Strategy hat sich zur führenden deutschen Unternehmensberatung für Geopolitik entwickelt – mit rund 300 Expertinnen und Experten weltweit. Für Agora Strategy ist es entscheidend, geopolitische Herausforderungen messbar, konkret und mit klarem Fokus in das strategische Handeln von Unternehmen zu übersetzen und gemeinsam mit dem Kunden zu implementieren. Dadurch wird ein deutlicher Mehrwert für die Kunden von Agora Strategy erzielt.  Entsprechend berät Dr. Blenk an der Schnittstelle von Wirtschaft und Politik momentan insbesondere zu strategischen Fragestellungen im Industriebereich, Stärkung von Resilienz und Krisenmanagement bei globalen Herausforderungen. Zuvor war Dr. Timo Blenk Generalsekretär der Schweizerischen Vereinigung für Politikwissenschaft (2015-2018) und Dozent an der Universität der Bundeswehr München (2014-2015). Dr. Timo Blenk wurde an der Universität St. Gallen mit einer Dissertation über die Finanzmarktregulierung in der Eurozone promoviert. Zuvor erhielt er Master-Abschlüsse in Internationalen Beziehungen und Volkswirtschaftslehre des Institut d’Etudes Politiques de Paris und der Freien Universität Berlin. Expertise Strategieentwicklung, Geostrategische Analyse, Internationalisierung und Lieferkettensicherheit, Globale Netzwerkentwicklung Auswahl an Publikationen und Podcasts Die sichtbare Hand der Geopolitik Die sieben entscheidenden Meerengen Südamerika: Der Rising-Star-Kontinent Agora Strategy Podcast - The Future of Power

Agora Strategy Executive Briefing on Space Executive Summary Space becomes increasingly crucial for defence and security, as space powers like the US, China and Russia engage in an arms race of counterspace capabilities and are planning for warfighting in space. Conflicts and wars are increasingly being fought in space and involving civilian and commercial assets, with some countries, e.g. Russia, already officially designating them as legitimate targets for retaliation. While this development puts commercial assets at risk, the push from European governments to build up critical infrastructure and strengthen their autonomy also holds great potential in the market for new defence capabilities in space. Implications for International Business Given the new urgency with which European governments pursue their military procurement, companies are often required to switch from individual manufacturing to mass production as quickly as possible. As Europe expands its investments and harmonises regulation, companies must deepen cooperation with public institutions and private peers, including cross-border alliances, to ensure interoperability, compliance and innovation speed. Consolidation and vertical integration across the value chain—from launch and manufacturing to downstream data services—will not only strengthen Europe’s autonomy but also provide funding opportunities and improve competitiveness. Key Topics Strategic role of space in Europe Space is essential for modern warfare and multidomain operations. The war in Ukraine demonstrates that the involvement of commercial space assets has fundamentally changed the nature of warfare. Earth observation (EO) and satellite communication (SatCom) services from low Earth orbit (LEO) enable real-time warfare and significantly impact the outcome of battles. Consequently, space has now reached the tactical level, enabling combat on hypertransparent battlefields.   Over the past decade, Europe, a self-proclaimed "global space power", has failed to consider the geopolitical aspects of its space policies. This has resulted in the temporary loss of its own access to space between 2022 and 2024, when Europe was not able to autonomously launch even its most important satellites into orbit. This was due to the suspension of Soyuz launches after the start of Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine, combined with the phasing out of the Ariane 5 launch vehicle, delays in the development of Ariane 6, and the halt of Vega launches. Furthermore, European countries have long neglected to build up their own capabilities in space and rely heavily on US space services for defence activities.   Still, Europe learned another lesson from Ukraine: that commercial assets can compensate for the lack of national space capabilities and thus improve sovereignty. Nevertheless, the dominance of Starlink and SpaceX demonstrates that such assets can create risks of critical dependency if its owners are not from the same jurisdiction. Political programs & institutional frameworks In contrast to NATO, which has no own space assets and depends on Member States making their capacities available when needed, the European Union has its own space capabilities with high technological standards. Most known are Galileo the Position, Navigation and Timing (PNT) system, which is more accurate than GPS, and Copernicus, the “gold standard” in EO. Both will also be involved in military activities in future and supplemented by IRIS² as Europe’s own multiorbital SatCom system until 2030. However, skepticism remains regarding the private sector’s contribution to financing and the system’s ultimate design and function: Some worry it will be overly complex and not provide sufficient data capacity, shaped more by competing interests between industry and governments than real-world requirements.   Building up sophisticated, common European capabilities in relevant space services will be a long-term challenge as gaps in the military sector are wide, especially in missile detection, geospatial intelligence, Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance (ISR), and in Space Domain Awareness. Even though it is impossible to replace dependencies on US and commercial services in the short term, there are several European initiatives to integrate the space capabilities of EU states and make them interoperable. For example, the recently published EU Defence Roadmap 2030 includes a European Space Shield as one of the four flagship projects. It aims to enhance interoperable national defence capabilities and ensure the protection and resilience of space assets and services.   In addition, the EU Space Act establishes a common framework to strengthen the internal market in the space sector. Not all European countries have a national space law, including Germany, where the last three governments declared their intention to pass one. An EU-wide regulation could therefore strengthen the European space sector and industry by providing Europe-wide investment security and framework conditions in the growing European market. However, industry representatives fear overregulation and a shift in competence at the expense of national control. They call for uniform (minimum) standards for all market participants, but with procedures differentiated according to company size and risk profile, so that the Act is practical, flexible, innovation-friendly, and industry-appropriate. Market & industry landscape The space sector is in a revolutionary phase similar to where commercial aviation was after the Second World War and the internet in the 1990s. Traditionally, the sector was characterized by governments commissioning agencies such as ESA or NASA to contract large companies to develop and build new systems individually and over the long term. In the last two decades, launch costs have dropped by around 90 per cent and radically changed the market, thanks to private venture capitalists and so-called NewSpace companies with innovative products and services primarily for commercial customers. Even large traditional space players – Airbus, Leonardo and Thales – are consolidating their space businesses to meet new, faster procurement requirements and better compete in the global market. The space economy is highly dynamic, with innovation cycles shortening at an increasing rate.   Over the next decade, more than 43,000 satellites are set to be launched, reshaping competition across orbits and applications, and fuelling a $665 billion market in manufacturing and launch services. Five major government and commercial mega-constellation projects in LEO will account for 66 per cent of the satellites launched in the next decade – SpaceX’s Starlink and Starshield, Amazon’s Kuiper, and China’s Qianfan and Guowang networks. However, despite accounting for only 9 per cent of new satellites, defence will once again become the market's economic anchor. Currently, budget priorities in Europe lie with defence and strategic autonomy. The urgent need for resilience and redundancies, as well as rising defence spending, creates opportunities and demands new technologies and readily available solutions.   Sovereign access to space will remain the critical bottleneck. Although Ariane 6 is now available and Vega C rockets can again launch smaller satellites, the European launcher crisis is not over. It is currently unclear whether Ariane 6 will be able to perform ten launches per year in future. While reusable rockets are now standard practice in the United States thanks to SpaceX, and China has made significant progress in this area, Europe has only just begun to discuss the successor to Ariane 6, required by the mid-2030s. To strengthen Europe's competitiveness and autonomy, and to catch up in terms of momentum and innovation, ESA has initiated the European Launcher Challenge. This initiative will promote new projects and provide financial support for five selected companies – Isar Aerospace, Maiaspace, Orbital Express Launch, PLD Space, and Rocket Factory Augsburg. They should raise Europe’s autonomy by providing launches for payloads of a few hundred kilograms into LEO from European spaceports with rockets manufactured in Europe. However, the European market will not be comparable to the United States or China in terms of numbers, and likely very few micro-launcher companies will survive in the long term unless ESA and national governments act as anchor customers and guarantee a certain level of launch demand. Geopolitical risks & future scenarios All actors in space face severe and growing risks regarding safety and security. For one, space is becoming increasingly congested and contested. Not only is there a massive increase in the number of active satellites, but the amount of space debris has also risen sharply: It is estimated that, due to more than 650 breakups, explosions, collisions or other anomalous events, around 54,000 pieces of debris larger than 10 cm, 1.2 million pieces between 1 and 10 cm in size, and an astonishing 140 million pieces sized between 1 mm and 1 cm are circling in space. Traveling with 8 km/h in LEO, a debris piece of 1 cm unleashes the kinetic effect of a hand grenade.   The increasing number of active and scrap elements in space raises the risk of further collisions and satellite failure, with each collision leading to new space debris, which in turn jeopardizes other objects. This is the very definition of the Kessler syndrome: Proposed by NASA scientist Donald J. Kessler in 1978, this scenario describes a chain reaction in which collisions between satellites and debris generate more fragments, thus exponentially increasing the likelihood of further collisions. This cascading effect can, once initiated, affect all satellites and ultimately render entire orbits unusable.   Besides the risks of incidents, both increased military reliance on space for tactical operations and rapidly improving space capabilities of potential adversaries mark a growing threat to public and private space assets. The United States, China and Russia now have extensive and growing counter-space capabilities to temporarily or permanently disrupt or destroy anyone’s space operations. These range from cyber-attacks, electromagnetic interference, jamming of data signals, lasers, rendezvous and proximity operations, i.e. approaches in space, to anti-satellite weapons and nuclear explosions in space. Furthermore, the increasing number of demonstrations of capabilities and operations, as well as the flying of military-related manoeuvres and strategic planning for warfighting in space, illustrate that future wars will not only be fought in and through space (which is already common), but also in space itself.   The arms race in space has already begun. Next is, it seems, an actual war fought in space. For the US Space Force, at least, “space warfare is a certainty in the future because the use of space in war has become vital”. Thus, space will be part of future conflicts and commercial assets are likely increasingly involved.

Vorausschau statt Ausnahmezustand – Geopolitisches Mindset als Kernkompetenz In einem Whitepaper für die neue Sonderausgabe des human Magazins  zeigen Dr. Timo Blenk, Senior Partner und CEO der Agora Strategy Group AG, und Christina Schäfer, Senior Consultant bei der Agora Strategy Group AG, auf, warum geopolitisches Denken für Unternehmen überlebenswichtig wird – und wie KI dabei hilft, Resilienz gezielt aufzubauen. Dabei verdeutlichen sie, dass globale Lieferketten durch geopolitische Konflikte, technologische Umbrüche und Ressourcenknappheit zunehmend unter Druck geraten. Statt nur zu reagieren, sollten Unternehmen geopolitische Szenarien durchspielen, kritische Abhängigkeiten erkennen und Handlungsspielräume sichern. Künstliche Intelligenz könne dabei unterstützen, Risiken frühzeitig zu identifizieren und datenbasiert strategische Entscheidungen zu treffen – etwa zur Diversifizierung, Preismodellierung oder Standortwahl. Dr. Blenk und Schäfer sind überzeugt: Resilienz ist planbar – durch Weitsicht, technologische Kompetenz und ein geopolitisches Mindset. Wer früh handelt, stärkt nicht nur seine Krisenfestigkeit, sondern sichert sich klare Vorteile im globalen Wettbewerb. Hier geht’s zum vollständigen Artikel: https://human-magazin.de/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/humanForwardDE.pdf

In dem Agora Strategy Group Geopolitik-Podcast „The Future of Power“, lädt Dr. Timo Blenk (CEO) monatlich Entscheidungsträger aus Diplomatie, Wirtschaft, Politik und Militär ein, um aktuelle geopolitische Entwicklungen zu diskutieren. Über die Einflüsse dieser zu informieren und fundierte Entscheidungsgrundlagen zu schaffen, ist der Kern dieses Projekts. Diesen Monat zu Gast ist Dmitri Alperovitch, Geopolitik-Experte und Mitbegründer sowie Executive Chairman des Silverado Policy Accelerator! In der 33ten Folge unseres Podcasts sprechen Dr. Blenk und Dmitri Alperovitch über den neuen Kalten Krieg, Donald Trump und Zukunftschancen für Europa!   Sie finden unseren Podcast mit Untertiteln auch auf Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbT2uYlhP1g Die wichtigsten Themen des Monats Wettlauf der Großmächte: China und die USA konkurrieren um die Vorherrschaft in Technologie, Wirtschaft und Energie US-Innenpolitik: Trumps Kurs, die orientierungslosen Demokraten und der Government Shutdown Sicherheitskapazitäten: Cyber, Weltraum und der europäische Verteidigungssektor     Hausmitteilungen   Alle weiteren Folgen des Podcasts Agora Strategy Webauftritt Agora Strategy bei LinkedIn Aktuelle Projekte & Veranstaltungen des Agora-Strategy-Teams Agora Strategy Institute Executive Mitgliedschaft White Paper: "Smart Resilience for an Uncertain Age" Agora Strategy Executive Briefing: La France, inquiète: Macron has only one year to secure his economic and European legacy Agora Strategy Executive Briefing: Eine globale Finanzkrise 2.0? Zwischen geopolitischer Disruption und finanzieller Fragilität

Wolfgang Ischinger zu Trumps Plan für den Nahost   05.10.2025     Im Interview mit Deutschlandfunk äußert sich Botschafter a.D. Prof. Dr. h.c. Wolfgang Ischinger, ehemaliger Vorsitzender der Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz sowie Ehrenvorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats der Agora Strategy Group AG, zu Trumps Plan für den Nahost.   Trumps Friedensplan sei eine Chance. So sehen es viele Staaten der Region, sagt Wolfgang Ischinger. Es brauche jedoch Zwischenschritte und Geduld. Das höchste Ziel sei, das Töten in Gaza zu beenden.  Hier geht es zur vollständigen Folge:  https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/interview-ischinger-wolfgang-praes-d-stiftung-muenchner-sicherheitskonferenz-100.html

„Naivität ist das größte Risiko“     September 2025     Im aktuellen Whitepaper des  human Magazins  zum Thema „SMART RESILIENCE: DEFENDING EUROPE. Strategien für einen zukunftsfähigen Kontinent“ analysieren Dr. Timo Blenk, Senior Partner der Agora Strategy Group, und Christina Schäfer, Senior Consultant bei Agora Strategy, die Gefahren hybrider Kriegsführung, denen Unternehmen zunehmend ausgesetzt sind, und welche Maßnahmen jetzt notwendig sind, um Angriffen von morgen standzuhalten.  Der Schutz kritischer Infrastruktur ist zur sicherheitspolitischen Daueraufgabe geworden. Was dabei oft übersehen wird: Pipelines, Datenkabel, Umspannwerke, Gesundheitsdienste, Verkehrswege oder Cloudzentren sind meist privat betrieben.   Damit rücken Unternehmen selbst ins Zentrum geopolitischer Auseinandersetzungen, sei es durch Sabotage, Cyberangriffe, Propaganda, wirtschaftliche Erpressung oder gezielte Desinformation.  Fazit: „ Wer heute noch glaubt, Geopolitik „geht uns nichts an“ oder „betrifft nur andere“, hat den Ernst der Lage nicht erkannt.“   Hier geht’s zum vollständigen Artikel:  DE Version ab S. 141: https://human-magazin.de/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/humanForward_DefendingEuropeDE.pdf   ENG version starting from p. 137: https://human-magazin.de/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/humanForward_DefendingEuropeEN.pdf