Oil, food, and other commodity prices all increase whenever and wherever a conflict breaks out anywhere in the world. Likewise, the Russia-Ukrainian War. In times of conflict, both the cost and demand for weapons rise. This conflict has brought in money for the weapons industry throughout the world and continues to bring in money. It should come as no surprise that the USA dominates the armaments business and makes the most money from it. Since the start of the war, US armament manufacturers have traded at an unprecedented level, shattering all prior records. Thus, the Military-Industrial Complexes should be used to evaluate the Russia-Ukraine War in terms of the economic interests of the main arm exporting countries (MICs).
When the Russia-Ukrainian War first broke out in late February 2022, it appeared that Russia may quickly annex Ukraine, but amazingly, Kyiv has remained unconquered. Why does it take a powerful nation like Russia so long to annex Ukraine? What are the motivating forces behind Ukraine’s continued opposition to Russia? The United States’ assistance and provision of cutting-edge armaments to Ukraine may be one solution. For instance, in September 2022, the nation received $3 billion in military assistance for Ukraine and its 18 neighbours, along with a shipment of $675 million in ammunition, armoured vehicles, and heavy weapons.
80 per cent of the world’s lethal weapons will be shipped between 2016 and 2022 by the arms industries of the US, UK, China, Russia, France, and Germany. Amid the conflict, these biggest arms exporters are also active in shipping weapons to Ukraine.
Read More: The Critical Role of Organizations in the Russia-Ukraine War
However, the United States rules the world’s armament trade. The United States controls 35% of the global market for weapons and is the largest exporter of weapons like howitzers, anti-ship missiles, Stinger missiles, and Javelin anti-tank missiles. Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, and Lockheed Martin are the top five US businesses that manufacture weapons. These are businesses that manufacture arms in the US.
Additionally, nations like China, Germany, France, and the United Kingdom have increased their defence spending. Arms are being sold like cupcakes, and shares in the weapons sector are gradually rising. For instance, the shares of some of the firms that produce arms were named, such as General Dynamics, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman, increased by between 8 and 12 per cent, and 18 and 22 per cent, respectively. States with a little budget for self-defence will live in constant fear of conflict if the same pattern is continued. The failure of the guarantees made by the treaties that non-nuclear governments signed for their protection, survival, and the maintenance of global peace and security is ultimately to blame.
Read More: The Russia Ukraine Crisis; is it really a World War III?
The introduction of military hi-tech weaponry like lasers, automatic rifles, and hypersonic missiles has increased global insecurity and forced nations to prioritise defence over human development. During his administration (1953–1961), US President Dwight D. Eisenhower stated his dread of the military-industrial complex. Every gun created, every battleship launched, and every rocket fired, he claimed, “Every gun that is made, every warship that is launched, and every rocket that is fired signifies in the final sense a theft from hunger that is not fed. Those who are cold and not clothed”.
The manufacturers of weapons will only keep taking advantage of people’s capacity to satisfy their financial needs. In addition to the Russia-Ukrainian War, the international community should take sensible and effective action to end hostilities in other war-torn nations throughout the globe, including Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, and others. Additionally, it should work toward the full implementation of disarmament agreements and should offer strong security guarantees through measures that foster confidence between nations that perceive danger from one another. The goal of “The New World Order,” which was to guarantee the security of the smaller states rather than the national interests of the large powers or the monopoly of the armaments industry, must also be reintroduced and reemphasized.
