Defence technology management: the effect of the manufacturing base on arms exports

We construct a trade-theoretic model for three open economies two of which are in conflict with each other and the third exports arms to the two warring countries. War efforts — which involve the use of soldiers and military hardware — and the price of arms are determined endogenously. The purpose of war is the capture of land, but the costs are that lives are lost and production sacrificed. We examine the effect of foreign aid and a tax on arms exports on war efforts.Whereas foreign aid to the warring countries is likely to increase war efforts, a tax on arms exports is likely to have just the opposite effect. The endogeneity of arms price helps to derive the optimal level of such a tax.

The article examines the international and legal aspects of the shaping and implementation of state policy in the field of military-technical cooperation, particularly in the context of arms and military equipment exports. The urgency of the study of this issue is due to the increasing scale of weapons’ trade and the number of participants in economic relations in the world arms market. Recently, there has been an increase in demand for weapons and ammunition due to rising tensions in international relations and the concentration of a significant number of states in their efforts to gain a much greater role in the world order. Increased competition in the arms market, the willingness of individual states to strengthen military power under any circumstances and the inconsistency of export control systems that exist in different states, have led to an intensification of the activities of unscrupulous arms exporters. As a result, the number of arms sales operations that provide the basis for armed conflict has increased. In this regard, the international community has focused on strengthening controls on the movement of weapons. As for today, the most effective regulatory system for controlling the transfer of weapons has been established within the European Union. Its effectiveness is determined by the binding nature of the treaties for the EU member states. International treaties, in particular the International Arms Trade Treaty, contain recommendations for countries around the world on the rules of conduct in the field of arms trade and do not specify strict measures to control arms exports. In this regard, the countries of the world use their own approaches to establishing rules for the export of weapons, which creates the conditions for the existence of different standards of export control. In these circumstances, there is a significant threat to increase the scale of the activities of unscrupulous arms exporters. Given the imperfection of the international legal regulation of arms exports, the urgency of the efforts of arms exporting states to harmonize their national legislation with international treaties, which define the rules of commercial entities in the arms market. Accordingly, a transparent and clear state policy in the field of arms trade should be considered one of the most important factors in the successful participation of the state in international relations.

The defense industry and its further development and strengthening are of great importance for the European Union and its member states, as thereby the EU Common Security and Defense Policy is also strengthened. In the Western Balkan region, the Republic of Serbia leads in the export of arms and military equipment. Therefore, the general interest of the Republic of Serbia is to harmonize its regulations governing the trade in military technology and equipment with the EU regulations, including the Council of Europe's Common Position 2008/944/CFSP.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse China and Russia’s relationship in terms of arms exports between both countries and its implications for the United States (US) using a qualitative method and the conceptual framework of Neorealism: hegemony and security cooperation. China and Russia are two great powers that have maintained close diplomatic ties since the Cold War Era. Both China and Russia cooperate in various sectors, including security. Since the collapse of the SU (USSR), which marked the establishment of post-Cold War Russia, the country has become a major arms exporter to China. This close relationship has dynamically developed in the last few decades. China-Russia security cooperation has been assessed as a security challenge for the US. The security cooperation between China, the new rival for the US since its rising, and Russia, the US’ former superpower rival in the Cold War era, is interpreted as a threat to US domination in the Asia-Pacific. However, this paper concludes that while China and Russia have a close relationship, China can surpass Russia’s military technology. That is why, although these countries relationships are close and Russia does not see China as its primary threat, this does not mean that Russia will let its guard down in facing China’s development. There is a tri-polar power balance between these countries and with the US. The main worry is if two actors get too close, leaving the remaining state isolated. Regardless of the global power equilibrium trajectory, China and Russia will become more closed than the US.

Hostilities in eastern Ukraine have highlighted the need for accelerated transformation of Ukrainian armed forces and strengthening country’s defense capabilities. Ukraine is an active consumer and exporter of weapons, so it needs to improve constantly its position in the international arms market, which, by the way, unlike most markets suffering from the COVID-19 pandemic, is constantly growing. The study aims to assess the prospects of Ukraine’s integration into the world arms market to secure its armed forces and achieve the highest possible level of arms exports. Methods of comparative analysis and integrated approach were used in the study. The obtained results demonstrated that Ukrainian arms export has fallen dramatically in recent years (from 1501 million USD in 2012 to 115 million USD in 2020); the largest importers were China (36% of Ukraine’s total arms exports), Russia (20%), and Thailand (17%). The main explanation for this is the necessity of transition to more technological weapons. Concerning weapon imports, Turkey, the USA, Great Britain, Poland, and Bulgaria became the main suppliers. It is about ammunition, electronics, including electronic warfare stations, means of communication, sniper rifles, grenade launchers, etc. The study substantiated that Ukraine should implement joint projects with other countries to fully develop its high-tech weapons in accordance with the latest military technologies.

This paper takes the initiative to study the causality between military spending (MS), GDP of military sector (GMS), armed forces personnel (AFP), arms exports (AE), and arms imports (AI) and economic freedom (FE). Objectivity is determined in Indonesia�Malaysia�Singapore. Panel data regression is using to test a series of hypotheses over the period 2014�2021. Furthermore, the probability parameter applied is ? <0.05. Various conclusions show that there are differences in the three observations. First, AFP and AE have a significant effect on EF in Indonesia. Second, MS, GMS, and AI actually affect EF in Malaysia significantly. Third, MS, GMS, and AFP have significant links to EF in Singapore. The results of the investigation provide useful insights into the progress of the military industry and weapons technology, thereby bringing about a more progressive economic escalation. Economic freedom as an identity that symbolizes the maturity of a country's prosperity. Therefore, peace is difficult to achieve if the demands to fight for prosperity are not carried out.

Arms export control measures are an important tool to defend the universality of human rights, democracy and to prevent conflicts. The European Union (EU) has a long tradition in striving towards these goals.One of the most important outcomes regarding such is the 2008 Council Common Position (CP) defining Common Rules Governing Control of Exports of Military Technology and Equipment Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). This article focuses on the implementation and effectiveness of this CP. In particular, it investigates whether EU countries have applied and enforced human rights principles in arms export practices following the approval of the CP or whether a promarket and pro-export approach have prevailed. In this way, it fills a lack of organic analysis on the impact of the CP. Secondly, for the first time, it compares EU-level regulation impact with that at the global level, in order to assess the ‘net value’ of the EU regulation at the international level also from a diachronic perspective. Lastly, a comparison with the national level offer suggestions for mutual reinforcing. By using quantitative methods, the research aims to offer empirical evidence concerning the EU arms export control regimes and their effectiveness and to contribute to the present debate about the means at the EU’s disposal to defend the universality of human rights and promote democracy. EU Common Foreign and Security Policy, human rights, arms trade, arms exports control and disarmament, normative power, democracy, autocracy, sanctions, arms embargo

Целью исследования является анализ экспорта российских вооружений на мировой рынок в условиях воздействия экономических санкций. В качестве инструментария исследования был использован метод статистического-экономического анализа, аналитический и логический методы, графический метод. Результатом проведенного исследования является анализ масштабов противодействия экспорту вооружений и военной техники из Российской Федерацией в период 2022/2023 годов со стороны США, стран ЕС, стран G7 и ряда стран, являющихся их союзниками, направленных на разрушение или ослабление военно-технического сотрудничества Российской Федерации с ее постоянными иностранными партнерами. К научной новизне статьи можно отнести авторские выводы об основных проблемах по адаптации экспорта российского оружия, боевой и специальной техники в условиях новой санкционной реальности на мировом рынке оружия. The purpose of the study is to analyze the export of Russian arms to the world market under the impact of economic sanctions. The method of statistical and economic analysis, analytical and logical methods, and the graphical method were used as research tools. The result of the study is an analysis of the scale of counteraction to the export of arms and military equipment from the Russian Federation in the period 2022/2023 by the United States, the EU countries, the G7 countries and a number of countries that are their allies, aimed at destroying or weakening the military-technical cooperation of the Russian Federation with its permanent foreign partners. The scientific novelty of the article includes the author's conclusions about the main problems in adapting the export of Russian weapons, military and special equipment in the new sanctions reality in the global arms market. main problems that significantly reduce the efficiency and limit the export potential of the military-industrial complex of the Russian Federation.

The 2011 Libyan civil war prompted a reassessment of the normative foundation of the EU's conventional arms export control regime as armaments manufactured in Europe were used by Gaddafi's forces during the war. The EU's foreign policy identity is based, partly, upon a common approach to arms export involving respect for common criteria for export licences. Yet, prior to the civil war, considerable amounts of military equipment had been exported by member states to Libya, notwithstanding grounds for restraint on the basis of several of the criteria. This article traces member states' arms export to Libya during 2005–2010 to explore whether member states favoured restraint or export promotion. It concludes that although aware of the risks of exporting, in a competitive market for military goods, member states sought commercial advantage over restraint, and comprehensively violated export control principles. This casts doubts on assertions of the EU acting as a “normative power”.

Arms exports have made a significant contribution to Western defence industrial bases. Mark Harvey looks at those factors which have an influence on the export of military equipment and how conventional arms exports have fared since Iraq was forced out of Kuwait.

Background. From the moment of its proclamation, the People's Republic of China sought to modernize the armed forces – the People's Liberation Army. The lack of a military-industrial complex was a significant problem, which the Chinese communist leadership has been trying to solve through active military-technical cooperation with international actors. Indeed, the active procurement of weapons allowed the PRC to reach parity or even surpass the US in a number of aspects. Meanwhile, the MTC has turned into not only a mechanism for strengthening national security, but also a tool of foreign policy. Methods. The following methods were used: analytical, historical, statistical, generalization. In the course of the research, the author relied on the principle of objectivism. Results. Solving the problem of the weakness of the technical and technological level of the PLA, China used the geopolitical conjuncture to obtain arms supplies. A key role was played by cooperation first with the USSR, and then with the russian federation. This partnership was associated with the introduction of an embargo by Western countries due to the events in Tiananmen Square. An important factor was also the supply of military equipment from Ukraine. At the same time, in the conditions of a full-scale russian-Ukrainian war, Beijing became an exporter of dual purpose products to russia. Overall, using the factors of unauthorized copying, low price policies and arms sales to sanctioned regimes, Beijing has become one of the world's top five arms exporters. China mainly exports weapons to Asian countries, and has also significantly strengthened its position in the African market. However, quality and service issues are causing more and more questions from buyers. Conclusions. Among the consequences of China's MTC: 1. creation of its own autonomous military industry; 2. obtaining an additional source for financing the modernization of the PLA; 3. significant strengthening of military capabilities in the context of global rivalry with the USA; 4. increased aggressiveness in foreign policy and worsening of relations with neighboring countries and the USA; 5. course on militarization of neighboring Asian countries and strengthening of their cooperation with the USA; 6. creating additional opportunities for strengthening authoritarian regimes through military and technical support and even promoting its aggressiveness towards other countries; 7. fueling bloody wars by non-democratic regimes; 8. obtaining greater access to the minerals of the countries of the Global South and increasing the level of dependence on cooperation with Beijing; 9. strengthening of new arms exporters (such as Pakistan) and weakening of others (russia, USA, Germany).

Увеличение государственных расходов на оборонный сектор в мире подтверждает важную роль военного фактора в развитии системы международных отношений. На фоне роста конкуренции в различных регионах и сферах продажа вооружений выступает как индикатор обстановки в мире. Экспорт вооружений и военной техники имеет не только экономическое значение, но и позволяет странам-экспортерам усиливать свое влияние в той или ином регионе земного шара. В статье проведен анализ состояния мирового рынка экспорта вооружений и военной техники для выявления ключевых игроков и тенденций. The increase in government spending on the defense sector in the world confirms the important role of the military factor in the development of the system of international relations. Against the background of growing competition in various regions and spheres, arms sales act as an indicator of the situation in the world. The export of arms and military equipment is not only of economic importance, but also allows exporting countries to increase their influence in a particular region of the globe. The article analyzes the state of the global arms and military equipment export market to identify key players and trends.

At the present stage of the development of the world economy, a number of fundamental changes are taking place in the international trade in arms and military equipment (AME), which are mainly associated with the increasing global crisis and increased geopolitical tensions in the world. Within the framework of study, we summarized the main trends and problems in the development of the world arms and military equipment market, which are formed as a result of the aggravation of relations between individual countries and groups of countries. In this regard, this article analyzes changes in the mechanisms, dynamics and structure of AME exports. As a separate aspect of analysis, an assessment of the opportunities for strengthening the positions of new player countries in the market is presented. The changes observed in recent years in the commodity and geographic structure of AME imports are revealed. It was found that due to modern military conflicts, the previously established structures of international arms and military equipment trade are becoming more complex and transforming, and disruptions in global supply chains are causing the formation of a new system of relations between arms exporters and importers

The 1970s witnessed Israel's emergence as a major exporter of military equipment. A 1981 CIA report1 ranked Israel fifth among the world's military exporters in 1980; the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) ranked it fifteenth that same year.2 Other sources have placed it variously at twelfth and seventh.3 In absolute terms, estimates of the monetary value of Israel's arms exports range from $1 billion to over $2 billion per year.4 What is undisputed is that Israel has become an important arms supplier on the world market, exporting combat-tested, high performance military equipment ranging from light arms and ammunition, communications devices, and defense electronics to highly sophisticated main weapons systems such as jet fighters, heavy tanks, naval vessels, and a whole array of missiles. Israel's natural clientele for arms exports have been third world countries, since the Soviet bloc has been off-limits and most of the industrialized countries either produce their own weapons or purchase them from NATO allies. Yet, large segments of the third world market are also

The paper tracks challenges to litigating (direct and indirect) imports of military equipment to Russia and Russia’s subsequent international humanitarian law of armed conflicts (IHL) violations committed in indiscriminate attacks in Ukraine. It asks whether arms export control is capable of preventing or mitigating the results of indiscriminate attacks in Ukraine. It is assumed that IHL compliance can be complemented by preventing military equipment from being delivered to recipients when there is a risk of serious IHL violations being committed with that equipment. By comparing arms transfers from Iran with other controversial arms exports, the paper examines if increased protection for IHL ensued by arms export control laws can remedy deficiencies in arms transfer decisions that do not account for IHL. If an answer is negative, corporate due diligence will perform a complementary role in respecting IHL when state authorisation for arms transfer fails to account for IHL.