Dual-Use Supply Chains and the New Geopolitics of Control
Why cryostats, lasers, and lithography tools matter
I had been planning to write about this topic - in fact I’ve tried to get interviews from deeptech companies to discuss the issue in my podcast - for some weeks now. I’m not alone. Just this week I attended a webinar on this very topic, and a couple of days ago the GQI newsletter hit my inbox, discussing the affects of geopolitics in the quantum sector. GQI has great data resources, and Joe’s analysis is an interesting read.
As I’m typing this in South of France, a fighter jet is roaring over my house. There’s nowhere to hide from what’s going on in the world.
I try not to write about quantum too much as I know my audience is wider, but as an industry that’s just forming, few presets, few standards, it’s an interesting benchmark on geopolitics and global supply chains.
The global race in quantum computing is often framed around scientific milestones: who achieves fault tolerance first, who scales qubit counts fastest, who unlocks commercial advantage. This is what my LinkedIn feed looks like. It’s an easy topic, as companies get to brag about their breakthroughs and progress. But behind the scenes lies another contest, one shaped by supply chains, export controls, and geopolitical trust. This is not something that Corporate PR teams support posting on LinkedIn.
Quantum computing is not just about labs, fabs, and algorithms. It is a story of dilution refrigerators built in Finland, ultra-stable lasers engineered in Japan, semiconductor tools designed in the Netherlands, and control electronics manufactured in the United States. These, and other components make quantum systems possible, and they are needed by anyone, anywhere, who wants to build a quantum computer. They are also increasingly seen as strategic assets which means they increasingly fall under export regulations.
The Infrastructure Behind Quantum Breakthroughs
Quantum computing is not one technology but several competing approaches, each with its own hardware dependencies. These are called “technologies”, “modalities” or “platforms”. You can think of them as sort of proprietary “operating systems”, a Microsoft system is not going to run on Apple OS and vice versa. Superconducting qubits, trapped ions, photonics, and neutral atoms all require distinct materials and tools. What they share is a reliance on specialized components produced by a small number of global suppliers.
Superconducting quantum systems developed by companies such as IBM, Google and IQM, operate at temperatures colder than outer space. They depend on dilution refrigerators capable of reaching millikelvin ranges. Only a handful of firms globally manufacture these systems, with European companies, Finland’s Bluefors being one, playing an outsized role. These refrigerators are not interchangeable commodities; they are precision-engineered platforms that can take years to design and deploy.
Trapped-ion systems rely on ultra-stable lasers and high-vacuum environments to manipulate individual atoms. Here, supply chains are concentrated in the United States, Europe, and Japan, where decades of investment in photonics and precision optics have built specialized industrial ecosystems.
Photonic and neutral atom platforms shift the dependency profile toward semiconductor fabrication tools, integrated photonics, and optical control systems. These, in turn, connect quantum computing to the broader geopolitics of semiconductor manufacturing, where capacity and expertise are already tightly concentrated.
Regardless of the modality, quantum computing advances depend not only on scientific discovery or startup investments, but on access to a narrow set of enabling technologies.
Supply Chains as Strategic Leverage
For decades, advanced research equipment circulated relatively freely among trusted partners. That assumption is now under pressure.
Export control regimes in the United States and the European Union increasingly target upstream technologies rather than finished products. Cryogenic systems, advanced semiconductor manufacturing tools, specialized lasers, and certain control electronics now fall under stricter licensing requirements, especially when exports involve countries perceived as strategic competitors.
This reflects a shift in how policymakers understand technological advantage. Rather than restricting knowledge directly, governments are focusing on the tools that enable progress. If a nation cannot easily acquire or reproduce these inputs, its innovation trajectory slows.
The logic is familiar from semiconductors, where lithography tools became focal points of global trade tensions. Quantum technologies now appear to be entering a similar phase.
It’s also important to remember that export regulations are a two-way street. If your country does not allow you to sell technology to another country, that other country likely is not going to sell to you. Product creators need to buy tools, materials and equipment, but they also need to sell the finished product.
A Comparative Lens: The US, EU, and Canada
While often grouped together as part of a Western technology ecosystem, the United States, the European Union, and Canada approach quantum supply chains from distinct positions of strength and vulnerability.
The United States: System Integrator and Standards Setter
The U.S. retains leadership in quantum system design, software, and venture investment. Its strength lies in integration combining hardware, algorithms, and commercialization pathways. American firms dominate in superconducting and trapped-ion platforms, and U.S. universities remain magnets for global talent.
However, the U.S. is not self-sufficient. It depends heavily on European suppliers for cryogenic systems and on Asian and European partners for semiconductor fabrication tools. Export controls allow Washington to shape the global landscape, but they also highlight domestic gaps in advanced manufacturing infrastructure.
The European Union: Precision Manufacturing Powerhouse
Europe’s comparative advantage lies in high-precision engineering. From cryogenic refrigeration to photonics and lithography, EU firms occupy critical nodes in the quantum hardware supply chain. These capabilities give Europe quiet but substantial leverage in shaping global technology flows.
The EU’s policy response increasingly emphasizes strategic autonomy, reducing dependencies while maintaining openness to collaboration. Investments in research, coordinated industrial policy, and updated dual-use regulations reflect an understanding that Europe’s strength is not only in invention but in enabling others to innovate.
Canada: Bridging Research and Alliances
Canada plays a unique role as both a research leader and a diplomatic bridge-builder. Its strength in photonics, quantum communications, and academic excellence positions it as a trusted partner across alliances.
Canada’s strategy has focused less on control and more on coalition-building. By aligning with both U.S. and European partners while maintaining open research networks, Canada seeks resilience through diversification rather than dominance. This approach may become increasingly valuable in a fragmented global landscape.
The Risks of Fragmentation
Export controls can slow adversaries, but they can also accelerate duplication. If countries perceive that access to critical technologies may be restricted, they invest in domestic alternatives. Over time, this can lead to parallel supply chains that are less efficient, more costly, and less collaborative.
Quantum computing remains a field where breakthroughs often arise from cross-border partnerships. Excessive fragmentation risks reducing the pace of discovery, increasing costs, and limiting interoperability. The challenge for policymakers is to protect security without undermining the collaborative foundations of innovation.
Innovation in an Era of Strategic Interdependence
Quantum supply chains reveal a deeper truth about emerging technologies: no country operates alone. Even technological leaders depend on ecosystems that span borders. Managing these interdependencies requires new frameworks that balance openness with resilience.
For companies, this means supply chain diversification and regulatory foresight are becoming as important as technical performance.
For governments, it means aligning industrial policy with diplomatic strategy. For researchers, it means navigating a landscape where collaboration and competition increasingly coexist.
The Quiet Contest That Will Shape the Deeptech Future
The future of quantum computing may hinge less on who achieves the next technical milestone and more on who secures access to the tools that make progress possible. Cryogenic systems, lasers, semiconductor tools, and precision materials are not glamorous, but they form the backbone of the quantum ecosystem.
The United States, the European Union, and Canada each bring different strengths to this landscape. Their ability to coordinate policies, maintain trust, and preserve openness will influence not only their own competitiveness but the global trajectory of quantum innovation.
Quantum computing promises transformative capabilities, but it does not work in a tech silo. The first commercial quantum computing uses will be hybrid quantum-classical supercomputer solutions, enhancing the development of AI, and in turn being enhanced by AI.
Realizing the promise of quantum+supercomputing+AI will require more than scientific brilliance. It will demand careful stewardship of the supply chains that underpin discovery and a recognition that in the quantum era, cooperation may prove just as strategic as control.
About Deep Policy
Stay relevant and connect the dots.
Hi, I’m Petra Söderling. Welcome to Deep Policy, a space where I help you understand how governments, technology, and innovation policy shape the world around us.
This newsletter and blog continue the conversation I began in my book Government and Innovation – the Economic Developer’s Guide to Our Future, and on my podcast Deep Pockets with Petra Soderling. If you’ve ever wondered why governments pour billions into quantum, AI, or biotech, or how geopolitics bends the path of technology, you’re in the right place.
Every week, I share a mix of deep-dive essays, timely analysis, and cultural reflections, always with an eye toward what matters for you: the choices being made now that will shape your future economy, your industry, and your society.
Additional Resources
For more analysis, insight, maybe some entertainment, please feel free to explore these:
Petra Soderling & Co Advisory Services
Consulting governments, NGOs and companies on the economic and financial impact of deeptech. It’s not just me, it’s a whole team! Selected testimonials for my work from private clients can be found here. A banner with most notable public clients can be found here.
Deep Pockets Podcast
Every second week, more or less diligently, I bring forward a guest to discuss all things in the intersection of government and innovation.
The Book: Government and Innovation - the Economic Developer’s Guide to our Future
My 2022 Amazon Hot New Release (editorial pick) is divided in three sections; the Tools that governments have to create new innovative industries, Examples from five countries who’ve done it right, and a How To section for implementation. Available in paperback or hard cover.
The audiobook: Government and Innovation - the Economic Developer’s Guide to our Future
My 2022 Amazon Hot New Release (editorial pick) is divided in three sections; the Tools that governments have to create new innovative industries, Examples from five countries who’ve done it right, and a How To section for implementation. Available in paperback or hard cover.
The Quantum Strategy Institute
In my role as the Head of Government and Consortium Relations at QSI, I’ve written many papers on how public quantum strategies support economic growth. Explore the full website or find my articles directly here. The views in this newsletter and subsequent social media posts are mine, and do not necessarily reflect those of the Quantum Strategy Institute.
This reminds us that innovation and progress are and always have been the result of academic-industry-government partnership. The government has a critical role in securing the resources and components, especially in these early years of quantum computing when the supply chains are still highly vulnerable. The government also has a huge role in maintaining that healthy balance of competition (export controls and strengthening the domestic supply chain) and cooperation (maintaining coalitions overseas).