The Current Column

Resilience, the new silver bullet

What we can learn from the MSC for security policy and peace

Leininger, Julia
The Current Column (2026)

Bonn: German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS), The Current Column of 18 February 2026

Bonn, February 18, 2026. Resilience dominates security policy. But without a democratic culture and a 360-degree view, it remains an empty formula.

“We need more of our joint production, more of our resilience, more coordination and effectiveness of our shared security architecture in Europe...” – with these words, Volodymyr Zelenskyy called for greater European unity at the 2026 Munich Security Conference. And he was not alone. There was hardly a panel or background discussion that did not mention “resilience”. Resilience of the economy, of supply chains, of the state's capability to act, of cyber systems.

The term now permeates almost all policy areas. Originally from psychology, the term refers to an individual's ability to cope with and recover from crises as well as not break down under stress. Today, resilience has become a political buzzword – a kind of silver bullet in the vocabulary of security policy. This can be productive if it builds bridges between sectoral silos. However, the term can become an empty phrase if it is not consistently considered in a holistic way.

Democracy is at the heart of resilience

In security policy debates, resilience is often understood in technical terms, such as protecting critical infrastructure, countering cyberattacks, and ensuring defense capabilities. This is necessary but not sufficient.

After all, defending against digital disinformation or external influence affects not only systems, but also political culture. In this context, resilience means enduring contradictions, engaging in controversy, and limiting polarisation. An open order can only remain resilient if trust, transparency, and participation are strengthened. Protecting democracy is therefore a key strategic resource.

Hardware alone does not create strength

Resilience requires material foundations, such as reliable supply chains, industrial capacity, technological sovereignty, and defense capabilities. However, resources alone do not create resilience.

It is often assumed that greater investment automatically means more resilience. However, this is not necessarily the case. While increased defense spending can convey a sense of security, it can also exacerbate fears. Resilience only arises when political measures are legitimised and supported by society. Technology and economic success are prerequisites, not guarantees.

Systemic instead of sectoral silos

Resilience is more than the sum of individual measures. A robust economy strengthens the state's ability to act. A sustainable social policy prevents erosion. Forward-looking foreign policy reduces risks. However, none of these building blocks works in isolation.

Systemic resilience means strategically interlinking defense, the economy, social affairs, and domestic and foreign policy. Security and peace arise from interaction. Those who plan in ministerial silos weaken the overall system. Those who create connections increase stability. In the German context, this is the role of the National Security Council.

Domestic and foreign affairs belong together

In an interdependent world, internal and external stability are interconnected. For a long time, Germany viewed itself as an actor that bolstered resilience abroad – through stabilisation and crisis prevention. With the “turning point” (‘Zeitenwende’) the focus has shifted more on its own security. However, internal resilience cannot be separated from external developments. Energy, supply chains, migration, and information spaces are all interconnected. Therefore, national resilience also requires a commitment to stability across borders. This commitment should be reflected in strategies and budget decisions.

Recognising vulnerability – strengthening cohesion

The inflationary use of the term promotes a social model of permanently resilient people. Such a claim is neither realistic, sustainable, nor healthy. Human weakness must be accepted and taken into account in policies for resilience.

Social resilience does not arise from constant stress, but rather from solidarity. It grows where vulnerability is acknowledged and where social security systems are effective. It grows where participation is possible and compensation is organised. Resilience is a collective process, not an individual heroic project.

Resilience has become a key political concept. It describes the ability to overcome crises without becoming incapacitated. However, state, economic, and military resources alone do not make for a resilient order.

Democratic culture, trust, and social cohesion are also crucial. Resilience must be considered in technical, political, and social terms at the same time. Otherwise, it will remain what it increasingly threatens to become: a silver bullet in linguistic usage—sharp in tone but blunt in effect.