In an interview on NBC's Expose in September 1991, Pierre Marion, a former Director of the French intelligence service, stated that: It would not be normal that we do spy on the (United) States in political matters; we are really allied. But in the economic competition, in the technological competition, we are competitors; we are not allied (Security Management 1992). Is it 4normal for competing nations to conduct economic espionage? This paper will show that there may be indirect strategic benefits from spying that go beyond the obvious direct benefits from access to valuable economic secrets. In such situations, economic espionage acts as a form of strategic trade policy that shifts profits from foreign firms to domestic firms and potentially improves national welfare. Porteous (1993) has sketched a similar argument. Many types of sensitive information may be obtained by means of economic espionage. If spying unearths the blueprints of a prodluct or the source code of software, the fixed costs associated with research and development can be reduced for domestic firms. In such a case, there are direct benefits for domestic firms, but no strategic benefits because the behaviour of the domestic firms in global markets will remain unchanged. On the other hand, information on contract bids, marketing plans, or costs of rival foreign firms may give rise to strategic benefits in global markets even though there are no direct benefits. Finally, if the production technology of foreign firms is obtained, there will be both a direct benefit from lower total costs for domestic firms and a strategic benefit on global markets due to lower marginal costs. This paper will focus on espionage performed to obtain marginal-cost reducing production technologies. While this paper considers espionage by the government on behalf of domestic firms, the analysis could easily be adapted to allow for spying by