Research communication

A UK House of Commons Defence Committee (HCDC) Report on the Gulf War recommended that the UK should be self‐sufficient in supporting its Armed Forces in times of crisis and not even rely on its Allies. This recommendation is at odds with UK Government policy which rejects any formal strategy of support for the defence industrial base preferring international open competition as its procurement philosophy. This paper examines the various factors ranging from the supply of raw materials, production capacity, stockpiling, international joint ventures, and competition through to the effects on the technological update of weapon systems resulting from this philosophy. It draws conclusions supporting the HCDC recommendation and calls for joint MOD‐Industry action to address the issues involved and thereby reduce the risks to the Defence of the Realm.     

Rent seeking and defence expenditure

A plethora of arguments from the ‘public choice school’ suggest that public goods are ‘under‐supplied’ by comparison with public sector provision of more private goods. The implication is that rent seeking by the ‘military‐industrial complex’ serves, in some measure, to offset potential allocative inefficiency. In this paper a comparison of rent seeking by producers of public goods and producers of private goods identifies a bias that favours public good supply. The bias results from the different way in which collective demand for public goods and for private goods is expressed. The prospect of larger rents to the ‘military‐industrial complex’ implies greater rent‐seeking expenditures in this sector. The extent to which public goods (and, in particular, defence) are ‘under supplied’ is much exaggerated.     

Whose Hearts and Whose Minds? The Curious Case of Global Counter-Insurgency

Traditionally regarded as a secondary activity in military thinking and practice, the notion of counter-insurgency (COIN) has undergone a remarkable renaissance. This analysis traces the origins of this renaissance to two distinctive schools: a neo-classical school and a global insurgency school. The global insurgency school critiques neo-classical thought and presents itself as a more sophisticated appreciation of current security problems. An examination of the evolution of these two schools of counter-insurgency reveals how the interplay between them ultimately leaves us with a confused and contradictory understanding of the phenomenon of insurgency and the policies and strategies necessary to combat it.