Can Global Companies Stay Global? C-Suite Strategies for 2025

How Multinationals Are Building Resilience Amid U.S.-China Rivalry and U.S.-India Tariff Tensions

The recent wave of tariffs, trade disputes, and geopolitical tensions has disrupted global commerce. From automotive to electronics, industries are grappling with fragile supply chains, constrained access to rare earths, and escalating costs linked to the U.S.-China rivalry and the emerging U.S.-India tariff war.

For CEOs and boards, the message is clear: paralysis is not an option. Leaders must analyze, plan, and act decisively to ensure their companies are resilient in a world where global integration is no longer guaranteed.

From Global Integration to Local Resilience

For nearly eight decades, multinational companies thrived by building globally integrated supply chains, R&D networks, and service hubs. That model is now under strain. Executives are asking fundamental questions:

• How fast can we exit markets if geopolitical risks escalate?
• Can we capture new opportunities quickly if trade corridors open?
• Are shared-service models for data, HR, and finance still viable in fragmented regulatory regimes?
• What should the multinational organization of 2030 look like?

Boards increasingly ask the central question: “Can my company remain global—and if so, how?”

Structural Segmentation: A New Model

To mitigate geopolitical shocks, multinationals are implementing “structural segmentation”—redesigning operations, supply chains, and governance structures to reduce exposure to political risk.

Examples include:

• Dual Tech Stacks: Companies creating separate IT systems in China to comply with local regulations.
• Ring-Fenced R&D: Shifting or isolating research capabilities from sensitive jurisdictions.
• Entity Restructuring: Reworking ownership models to navigate sanctions and local compliance.

At the same time, many firms are accelerating U.S. investment—expanding production footprints not only for commercial returns but also for diplomatic and strategic alignment. For sovereign wealth funds and state-linked enterprises, such moves are as political as they are financial.

Asian Multinationals Lean In

Asian corporates are adapting aggressively:

• Automakers are expanding U.S. plants rather than relying on Mexico-based production.
• Indian pharmaceutical firms are rebalancing their research and manufacturing between the U.S. and India.
• IT services companies are scaling up local hiring in North America and Europe to meet demand while hedging geopolitical risk.

These companies view global uncertainty not only as risk but also as a platform to expand presence in key growth markets, all while maintaining home-country supply chain origins.

U.S. Multinationals Face Their Own Choices

For U.S.-based multinationals, the domestic market remains a bedrock of capital, technology, and innovation. But the strategic challenge lies abroad. China, long the centerpiece of global growth strategies, is now complicated by tariffs, export controls, and political headwinds. American firms must ask whether they can still compete meaningfully inside China without disproportionate risk.

At the same time, India’s rapid economic rise—coupled with ASEAN’s collective market potential—offers compelling alternatives. No single country can replace China’s scale, but India plus ASEAN could equal half its market within a decade. The question for CEOs is not whether to pivot, but how fast to diversify footprints to capture Asia’s next growth wave while managing geopolitical risk.

• Can American firms still operate meaningfully inside China?
• Can U.S.-based multinationals still operate meaningfully inside India?
• Should they pivot more aggressively to India and ASEAN, where growth opportunities are accelerating?

Executives often ask whether India can replace China as a market. The reality: India alone cannot match China’s scale. But India plus ASEAN could equal around 50% of the Chinese market within the next decade—enough to justify serious diversification.

Key Numbers / Facts Box – Multinationals and Geopolitics

• $120B: Annual U.S.-India trade at risk from tariff disputes.
• 60%: Share of global trade passing through regions impacted by sanctions/tariffs.
• 19 of top 20 automakers have announced new U.S. manufacturing or sourcing initiatives in the last 3 years.
• 50%: Combined size of India + ASEAN consumer markets relative to China’s projected by 2035.

Executive Takeaway: Global integration is no longer the default business model—it is a strategic choice requiring careful adaptation.

• Asian multinationals are investing in U.S. capacity while keeping roots in their home supply chains.
• U.S. companies must strike a balance: stay competitive in China while diversifying into India and ASEAN.
• All multinationals need structural segmentation—separating operations, R&D, and data to manage regulatory and geopolitical fragmentation.

For CEOs, CFOs, and boards, the priority is resilience. The firms that act decisively—redesigning structures, diversifying markets, and capturing incentives—will not just survive geopolitical shocks. They will emerge as the next generation of truly global enterprises.

Have you read?
The World’s Best Business Schools.
The World’s Best Fashion Schools.
The World’s Best Hospitality And Hotel Management Schools.