Renaud Bellais

The Marxist analysis of war and military expenditures, between certainty and uncertainty

In analysing capitalism, Karl Marx dealt little with issues of international relations and militarism – Friedrich Engels was in charge of these questions. But war has never been integrated in the Marxist diagram. However, Marx and Engels’ writings contain essential remarks on international conflicts conceived as a consequence of the class war, on militarisms role in industrial development and on trade wars replacing armed conflicts. These ideas have later been developed by Marxist theorists, notably in pre‐revolutionary Russia, with an insistence on the warlike character of capitalism at the stage of imperialism. The Marxist analysis of militarism was continued after the Second World War, accompanied by a controversy on the impact of military expenditure on the profit rate.

Technical systems and cross-sector knowledge diffusion: an illustration with drones

ABSTRACT If cumulativeness is one feature of knowledge as economic good [Foray, D. 2006. The Economics of Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press], one may wonder why knowledge produced in a given sector does not result in several applications thorough the whole economy. Therefore it is important to understand the dynamics of knowledge that helps a given piece of knowledge to overcome sectorial silos and become more transversal. Here, focusing on Drones, patents analysis reveals how different technical systems use or do not use the same knowledge to solve identical issues or needs. This paper offers three major advantages. First, it allows distinguishing between component knowledge linked with technological bricks and architectural knowledge linked with system integration. Second, it opens new possibilities to measure the transversality of knowledge or its duality (beyond the debates in defense economics). And finally, it offers the opportunity to empirically analyse duality using patent databases.

The Economic Imperative of Europeanizing Defense Innovation

Security of supply and the mastering of defense innovation are the grounds for strategic autonomy that is at the heart of true sovereignty. This is the reason why many European countries have chosen to develop and maintain a domestic defense industrial base. While such policy was relevant for decades, the rising costs of defense capabilities and budgetary constraints should push these countries to gather resources. This is notably the case for defense innovation, which requires a certain level of investment to be effective due to threshold effects. The need to Europeanize defense innovation also results from the reliance of defense industry on non-defense innovations and from the impacts of the fourth industrial revolution on arms manufacturing. In this context, the Europe Defence Fund could provide the right incentives to achieve both transformations through a true Europeanization of defense innovation.

The Political Economy of Predation, Manhunting and the Economics of Escape

Book review. The political economy of predation, manhunting and the economics of escape, by Mehrdad Vahabi, New York, Cambridge university press, 2016, 406 pp., £79,99 (Hardback), ISBN 978-1-107-13397-6

Fleet management in European integration: the case of military helicopter support

ABSTRACT The article focuses on both economics and spatial issues related to Maintenance Repair and Overhaul (MRO) of defence platforms in Europe. Using facts and figures related to costs, trends and fleet sizes evolution, the authors discuss the interest of a spatial reorganisation of MRO production. Given the fiscal situation of the main European countries with a modern army, the relevant scale to consider the reorganisation is certainly Europe. Through the example of defence helicopters fleets of a selection of European countries, the authors address the question of cooperation of the MRO. A greater cooperation in the support of fleets would lead to a spatial reorganisation of MRO. On one side economies can be expected from this reorganisation, but, on the other hand, new problems arise. Specifically, a number of costs associated with different forms of “distances” – geographical, operational and political distances – limit the potential savings that could be expected. This work provides insights on these important issues for the construction of a European defence, both in its political, military and industrial dimensions.

Defence Firms beyond National Borders: Internationalisation or Multi-Domestic Approach?

Since the end of the cold war, the arms industry has been experiencing a deep structural transformation. The logical consequence of such short-term and structural evolutions is that companies in the arms industry are looking to access markets beyond national borders. Such transformation becomes a policy concern, since the core regulatory framework has been built on a national basis and there are very limited structural and regulatory means for dealing with an international, or even a transnational, industry in such a sensitive activity as weapons development and production. This chapter wonders whether it is possible to qualify such transformation of the arms industry as an internationalisation process and whether it can be compared to the globalisation of commercial activities. It compares what has happened and continues to happen in the arms industry with the globalisation experienced by commercial industries.

Public-Private Partnerships and the Transformation of Defence Investment

Launched in the early 1990s in the United Kingdom, Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) induced radical changes in both the public-private boundaries and the production of state-provided services. Such budgetary revolution impacted the biggest state spender in capital expenditures, that is, the Ministry of Defence. Today many MoDs are expected to leverage on the British experience and develop their own approach of PPPs to overcome both the ineffectiveness of their defence spending and todays stalemate in public budgets. This chapter leverages on British experiences over the past two decades to analyse the benefits and limits of PPPs in the realm of defence. Does such contractual arrangement fit defence-related investment? This chapter explores the on-going redefinition of public and private realms in military matters and it puts into relief the key dimensions of PPPs in terms of contractual arrangement.

Defense innovation at any (out of control) cost? The stalemate in today's R&D and an alternative model

Technological superiority is a key element to achieve defense effectiveness, and R&D spending is crucial to access leading-edge technologies. Nevertheless, the current defense R&D model seems to reach its limits, leading to an out-of-control burden: In spite of spending almost USD70 billion yearly, defense R&D in NATO countries does not produce the expected results. This low effectiveness leads to criticism about todays model of defense R&D, especially the channeling of credits by large incumbents through the Lead System Integrator model. Spurring disruptive technologies and path-breaking innovation requires an alternative approach. It is then interesting to analyze the possible use of venture-capital mechanisms to complement the mainstream approach to defense R&D. Even though the article does not develop a full analysis of the relationship between defense R&D and the principles of venture capital, it identifies criteria for such an alternative approach.

THE FIGHT OF A 'CITIZEN ECONOMIST' FOR PEACE AND PROSPERITY: KEYNES AND THE ISSUES OF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY

John Maynard Keynes was a citizen economist, anxious to defend a capitalist system threatened by the rise of totalitarianism during the inter‐war period. His criticism of the Versailles treaty in 1919 was supported by the idea of a link between economic prosperity and international peace. During the crisis of the 1930s, he advocated using the League of Nations for a peaceful settlement of international conflicts; while being in favour of economic interventionism, he criticised mercantilist policies. He recognised that military expenditure may be used as a reflationary policy, but after 1945 his theory was misused to promote the development of a ‘defence‐based’ economic policy.

WAR AND PEACE ISSUES IN THE HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT: INTRODUCTION

10.1080/10242690802354246 Defence and Peace Economics 24-2694 (print)/1476-8267 (online) Original Articl 2 08 Taylor & Francis 9 50 ctober 2 08 F nnyCoulomb fanny. oulo b@upmf-grenoble.fr The rising cost of the ‘global war on terrorism’ is pushing American defence spending to over