Search results

This paper aims to provide a case study of complex conflict management within the arms race on the Korean Peninsula. Exploring the complex nexus of nuclear weapons, asymmetry and a qualitative arms race, the study explains how the arms race between Seoul and Pyongyang has promoted stability on the Korean Peninsula.

Presenting the limits of arguments that the US security guarantee is the factor that saved the two Koreas from going to war again, this paper explores the utility of the inter-Korean arms race as a stabilizer that promotes indirect negotiations. While presenting Korean anomalies, this paper analyzes the three stages of the inter-Korean arms race – especially its nuclear weapons, its asymmetry and the nature of arms races – and provides extant explanations on the causes and consequences of the qualitative arms race. These key elements drive the states’ strategic motives.

Using the case of the inter-Korean qualitative arms race and US extended nuclear deterrence on the Korean Peninsula, the study shows the complexities of conflict management today. This paper identifies three contributing factors – US nuclear weapons, asymmetry and the qualitative characteristic of the arms race – to explain the enduring stability on the peninsula despite the arms race’s intensification. The paper finds that although US nuclear-extended deterrence plays a critical role, it does not capture the full context of the ongoing, dynamic inter-Korean arms race; a prolonged arms race between the two Koreas has become a new regularity; the qualitative characteristic of the inter-Korean arms race, which is driven by technological advancement, contributes to stability in the arms race; and as the constant mismatch in priority technologies becomes more severe, the changes to the existing asymmetry could increase instability.

This paper offers a diverse perspective to the literature on conflict management and captures the complexities of 21^st-century conflict management. Through a thorough examination of the inter-Korean arms race, it brings readers’ attention to the nested dynamics within the arms race and shows how an intensifying arms race can promote stability. Furthermore, the paper explains the implications for potential instability – fueled by the comprehensive mix of a dynamic qualitative arms race and the US extended nuclear deterrence – in the Indo-Pacific region.

The goal of this chapter is to reexamine the nature and structure of the military–industrial complex (MIC) through the works of John Kenneth Galbraith. MIC, or military power as he prefers, is a coalition of vested interests within the state and industry that promoted the military power in the name of “national security” for their interests. Galbraith’s theory of giant corporations helps us understand the role of military corporations in the MIC. Moreover, he is a critical scholar in examining this topic because he was a political insider in the Roosevelt, Kennedy, and Johnson administrations and a prominent public intellectual against the Vietnam War. Against this background, this chapter has three parts. After explaining the development of military Keynesianism with respect to the main economic thoughts, it examines the history of the MIC and its impact on economic priorities during and after the Cold War through Galbraith’s works. Finally, this chapter discusses MIC’s relevancy today and evaluates Galbraith’s prophecies.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a detailed insight into the global military robot industry with an emphasis on products and their applications.

Following an introduction which includes a brief historical account, this provides an industry overview, including various market dimensions and a discussion of the geopolitical and technological factors driving market development. The three following sections provide details of land, airborne and marine robots, their capabilities and deployments in recent conflicts. Finally, brief conclusions are drawn.

Military robots which operate on land, in the air and at sea constitute a multi-billion dollar industry which is growing rapidly. It is being driven by geopolitical tensions, notably the military-technology arms race between China and the USA and the conflict in Ukraine, together with technological progress, particularly in AI. Many robots possess multi-functional capabilities, and the leading application is presently intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. An increasing number of heavily armed robots are being developed, and AI has the potential to impart these with the capacity to deliver lethal force without human intervention. Although heavily criticised in some quarters, this capability has probably already been deployed on the battlefield. With ever-growing military budgets, escalating political tensions and technological innovations, robots will play an increasingly significant role in future conflicts.

This provides a detail account of military robots and their role in modern warfare.

This paper examines the short-term market impact of the beginning of the military conflict between Russia and Ukraine (February 24, 2022) on the world’s largest defense firms.

The authors examine the world’s 100 largest listed defense firms at and around the beginning of the military conflict between Russia and Ukraine using an event-study methodology.

We observe a positive and statistically significant stock price reaction at and around the beginning of the military conflict. These results are consistent with the asset-pricing perspective/expected cash flow hypothesis. Consistent with the captured regulator theory, we find superior market returns for the two portfolios with a greater weight of defense sales. Superior market returns are also found for defense firms with higher R&D and capital expenditure intensity. Finally, these reactions are reinforced or mitigated by other firm-specific characteristics such as size, profitability and institutional ownership.

The effect of the war on stock markets has been relatively little examined in the financial theory. This study intends to fill this gap in the literature.

In this work, the authors analyze the dynamic interdependencies between military expenditures and the real economy for the period 1970–2018, and the authors' approach allows for the existence of dominant economies in the system.

In this study, the authors employ a Network General Equilibrium GVAR (global vector autoregressive) model.

By accounting for the interconnection among the top twelve military spenders, the authors' findings show that China acts as a leader in the global military scene based on the respective centrality measures. Meanwhile, statistically significant deviations from equilibrium are observed in most of the economies' military expenses, when subjected to an unanticipated unit shock of other countries. Nonetheless, in the medium run, the shocks tend to die out and economies converge to an equilibrium position.

With the authors' methodology the authors are able to capture not only the effect of nearness on a country's military spending, as the past literature has documented, but also a country's defense and economic dependencies with other countries and how a unit's military expenses could shape the spending of the rest. Using state-to-the-art quantitative and econometric techniques, the authors provide robust and comprehensive analysis.

This paper aims to center the experiences of three cohorts (n = 40) of Black high school students who participated in a critical race technology course that exposed anti-blackness as the organizing logic and default setting of digital and artificially intelligent technology. This paper centers the voices, experiences and technological innovations of the students, and in doing so, introduces a new type of digital literacy: critical race algorithmic literacy.

Data for this study include student interviews (called “talk backs”), journal reflections and final technology presentations.

Broadly, the data suggests that critical race algorithmic literacies prepare Black students to critically read the algorithmic word (e.g. data, code, machine learning models, etc.) so that they can not only resist and survive, but also rebuild and reimagine the algorithmic world.

While critical race media literacy draws upon critical race theory in education – a theorization of race, and a critique of white supremacy and multiculturalism in schools – critical race algorithmic literacy is rooted in critical race technology theory, which is a theorization of blackness as a technology and a critique of algorithmic anti-blackness as the organizing logic of schools and AI systems.