CC BY
1QbSUMUb УРвУЮ SCIENTIFIC ARTSAKH НАУЧНЫЙ АРЦАХ № 4 (19), 2023
ShSbUUQhSni-fd3nhh, ECONOMICS, ЭКОНОМИКА
TECHNOLOGICAL CHALLENGES RESHAPING THE DEFENSE INDUSTRY AND THEIR IMPACT ON ECONOMIC GROWTH * 1
UDC 338/330.1 DOI: 10.52063/25792652-2023.4.19-167
GYULNARA DANIELYAN
Public Administration Academy of the Republic of Armenia, Chair of Administration, Ph.D. Student,
Yerevan, the Republic of Armenia gyulnaradanielyan20hk@paara.am, ORCID: 0009-0007-4266-0495
Inspired by technological innovations the ways wars are nowadays led have dramatically changed especially after the 4th industrial revolution. Technologies raise many issues for the future of global defense ranging from changes in military structures, strategies eventually affecting the overall economies of the countries. The aim of our article is to unveil some of the defense issues based on technological advancements that are serving as driving forces for the economic growth and as such underline the significance of defense R&D. The problems considered in the article mainly refer to the study of advanced defense industry within the framework of newly adopted security challenges and their overall impact on the economic growth (taking into consideration applicable experience from other countries).
The scenarios of "fixed" threats are no longer determinant for the wars since the rapid changes in the sphere make conflict affected countries be more predictive against each other. Our problem is to study the challenges of technological changes and countries' capability of adaptation to it. To give the "big" picture of technology-affected defense industry, we have used the method of scientific abstraction and used quantitative and qualitative data analysis on the relation between defense and economy.
Thus, the research has shown that significant features of modern military defense related technologies that link people, weapons, sensors, platforms, AI-based decision-making equipment and eventually result in an immense increase in speed, synchronization and provide mass effects also have their undeniable impact on the country's economy.
Keywords: defense, economy, security, technology, R&D, peace, military.
* ^ni^wbQ libp^wjwgi[b[ t 30.09.2023^., qpw^nulbf 28.10.2023^., mqwqpnLpjwl QliiyiLliilbf 30.12.2023^.:
1 This work was supported by the Higher education and Science Committee of MESCS RA (research project N—23AA-5B013).
167
QbSUMUb УРвУЮ SCIENTIFIC ARTSAKH НАУЧНЫЙ АРЦАХ № 4 (19), 2023
Literature Review
There are various approaches whether defense spending affects economies positively and negatively. Dunne, Smith, and Willenbockel (2005), sometimes known as DSW (2005) provided an influential neoclassical approach by adopting the framework of the economic growth through empirical research.
Atesoglu (2002), Kollias, Mylonidis, Paleologou (2007) argue that defense spending increases purchasing power and aggregate demand, thus creating positive externalities and positively affecting economic growth. Whereas D'Agostino, Dunne, and Pieroni (2012), Dunne and Tian (2015) suggest that defense spending has negative impact on the economies of the country considering the argument of "guns vs. butter" focusing on the concept of trade-offs.
Current technological advancements have brought colossal changes to almost all sectors of human interaction including defense. The approaches to defense R&D have been criticized in many aspects since certain economists consider that defense R&D does not necessarily serve civilian sector as well. Lichtenberg admits that unlike cons and pros on this matter, defense R&D is continuously being funded and the majority of the countries pay significance to budget for military purposes.
Meantime, current R&D necessarily crosses the fact that technological superiority and situational awareness determine political and economic decisions and as Cowan& Fora state, R&D expenditures have been steadily increasing since World War II.
The evolvement of defense industry as a part of economy is beneficial especially for the countries at regional conflicts, yet it should be beneficial during the peacetime as well. Hence, Bitzinger & Richard assume that cluster formation serving both civilian and defense purposes will eventually magnify power projection in the whole economy.
Technological Advancement and R&D as Driving Forces for Enhancing Military Capabilities
The disputes over the negative and positive relations on the economic growth both have their considerable arguments. Currently military spending is steadily rising and changing its composition. It peaked in the late 1980s with the processes of improving East-West relations and then declined with the end of the Cold War. However, in 1999, the 'global war on terror' (driven mainly by the cost of war in Afghanistan and Iraq) made countries emerge massive defense spending (Skons 35). Following 2001, NATO defense ministers openly acknowledged the goal of allocating 2% of GDP to defense (which took different volumes in case of developed and developing countries due to colossal differences in their GDPs). At the level of heads of state and government in 2014, NATO partners agreed on allocating 20% of defense resources to equipment upgrading (NATO 2014). Similar objectives were quickly approved by the European Council (2016).
However, NATO's dataset of defense expenditure shows mainly a tendency of growth as seen from Table 1.
Table 1 : Defence expenditure
Million national currency unite
Current prices
Albania (Leks) Bclgjum (Euros) Bulgaria (Leva) Canada (Canadian dollars) Croatia (Euros) Czechia (Koruny) Denmark (Kroner) Estonia (Euros) Finland (Euros) France (Euros) Germany (Euros) Gtcece (Euros) Hungary (Forinl) Italy (Euros) Latvia* (Euros) Lithuania* (Euros) Luxembourg (Euros) Montenegro (Euros) Netherlands (Euros) North Macedonia (Denars) Norway (Kroner) Poland* (Zbtys) Portugal (Euros) Romania* (New Lei) Slovak Republic (Euros) Slovenia (Euros) Spain (Euros) Turkiyc (Liras) United Kingdom (Pounds) United States (US dollars)
3 913 1 102 20 076 Sll 41 003 22 769 386 3 004 39 149 34 749 3 939 281 402 18 427 221
52 7 788 5 743 48 660 31 874 2 263 9 014 752 366 9 508 29 727 39 902 653 942
16 671
3 789
1 116
23 900 804 47 264 22 633 418
3 065 39 199 35 898
4 073 316 338
17 642 254 425 225
51
7 816
5 853 49 529 39 940
2 384 10 337 889 361 10 000 32 522 38 940 641 253
1 186 23 474
45 598 24 190 450
3 089 39 950 37 598
4 190 362 798
20 226 364 575 213 56
8 234
5 770 54 022
37 082
2 364
10 738 907 406
9 014
38 203 41 590
656 059
17 199 3 932
1 255 30 761
812 52 805 24 961 479
3 131 40 852 40 265
4 208 468 765
21 166 430 724 288 58 8 539
5 532 56 664 37 558
2 424 14 765
935 422 10 528 47 323 43 257 642 933
18 995 4 101
1 593 29 025
805 59 752 28 787 521
3 238 42 748 42 127
4 560 436 500
21 702 601 895 301 64 9 456 6 232 61 349 42 824
2 750 17 183
1 098 463 11 172 68 300 45 202 672 255
21 670 4 253 3 771 29 949 881 68 373 29 929 569
3 483
44 206 46 936
4 483 636 566
21 042 618 977 341 66
10 778 8029
66 318
45 404 2 947
19 527 1 610 511
11 281 79 987
46 509 750 886
21 348
4 665
1 920 31 289 861 74 257 31 962 630
3 642 46 018 51 392
4 812 852 321
26 360 651
1 030 373
72 11 249
8 30 3 68 054 52110
2 867 21 431
1 796 498 11 240 93 910 49 495 770 650
23 072
5 276
2 109 31 976
1 150 84 864 33 161 633
3 503 47 790 52 431
6 764 927 965
28 015 696 1 105 341 77
11 789 10 604 72 483 58 304
3 283 22 027 I 746 645
12 546 116 482
52 291 793 990
25 848 6 529
2 672 33 900
1 219 91 000 38 726 779 4 485 49 616 57 681 8 054 1 212 914 28 758 813 1 649 485 82 14 808 12 899 83 865 73 898
3 391 24 311
1 983 737 14 135 203 603 53 878 821 830
40 256 6 658 3 413 39 339 1 312 112 100 47 169 1 101 6 892
53 300 64 055
6 703 1 813 470 29 718 967
1 872 573 123
15 751
17 025 89 657
133 720 3 921 39 294
2 465 873
18 045 339 901
54 136 860 000
The relations between defense and economic growth can be explained differently. One approach is proposed by "augmented Solow model" in DSW (2015) study. It intends the following Cobb-Douglas production function:
Y(t)= (K(t)) a [A(t)* L(t) ]1- a (1)
Where Y(t) denotes aggregate real income, K(t) is the real capital stock, L(t) is labor, and the technology parameter A(t) evolves according to:
A(t)=A0 * egt * (m(t)) y
Where g is the exogenous rate of Harrod-neutral technical progress and m(t) is the share of military expenditure in GDP.
Thus, the formula shows the interconnection between real capital stock, labor (which in our case should be tech-oriented mostly), technology impact and the exogeneity of technical progress over military expenditure and its share in GDP.
The question of a long-run economic growth through military spending has been answered by D'Agostino, G., Dunne, J. P., & Pieroni, L. (2017) negatively. Authors considered Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) dataset covering 170 countries (extending back to 1949 for the majority of the countries). The findings unveiled that over 20-year period, a 1% increase in military spending decreases economic growth by 9%. The negative impact was apparent for OECD member countries mainly.
In any of the possible scenarios military spendings are almost unavoidable and defense R&D comprises a sustainable part of defense industry. Though defense R&D has been criticized within the framework of economic literature because it was assumed that the defense R&D is ineffective as compared to civilian R&D yet countries have not stopped preserving the budget for military purposes (Lichtenberg, 431-457). Since World
War II defense industry has been technology-driven. However, security challenges are colossally different nowadays and military-industrial complexes of the countries face those challenges whether or not they are prepared to it.
Defense R&D spending as a percentage of total government R&D spending is a statistic that indicates the relative importance of defense R&D in each country's R&D portfolio. Figure 1 presents the steadily growth of defense R&D share in the total R&D budget indicating the continuous growth of the latter.
Figure 1 Leading government spending on defense research and development (R&D) among OECD members in 2021, by country (in share of R&D budget))1
States 47.2%
OECD total*" Turkey Korea Rep. France United Kingdom'"" Australia" Hungary Poland Germany Norway Netherlands
Currently defense effectiveness is mainly based on technological superiority, that is why the countries (namely Unites States, Western European countries) steadily increase their R&D expenditures (Cowan & Fora, 851-868). It leads to several positive effects on the overall economy. Defense R&D creates demand for highly qualified labor force (scientists, technicians, engineers) which in its turn upgrades the income and contributes to the economic growth. Cutting-edge technologies result in spillover effects for other sectors as well. Spin off technologies suggest applications going beyond the defense sector (considering also dual-use product implementation).
The radical changes brought by technologies tend to unveil scientific and technical potential supporting the legitimization of R&D. Countries necessarily need to use peacetime to generate technological opportunities (both civilian and military). As a result, new technologies and the opportunities provided by the latter have helped to debug the weapons and improve their usage in many aspects (including but not limited to resource saving, accurateness, the implications of time-bound and distance-bound modern
1
Leading government spending on defense research and development (R&D) among OECD members in 2021, by country (in share of R&D budget)) https://www.statista.com/statistics/1102845/government-research-development-defense-spending-oecd-country/ ( last access 27.12.23)
solutions). The improved armory thus becomes more competitive in the external market and provides opportunity for defense exports. Strong defense capabilities (driven by technological superiority) can make the country an attractive supplier thus generating revenue and improving trade balance (in Armenia's case the improvement of trade balance is one of the essential issues as the import ratings colossally exceed export ratings). So, the stimulation of domestic industries and foster collaboration possibilities between defense and other sectors have all the chances to boost economic growth in the country. The collaboration between various sectors can lead to knowledge transfers and the development of human capital which in its turn will have its positive effects on the overall economy. But if we consider the case, when the country is far from having domestic defense production, we may still admit that it needs to take measurements to maintain peace and security so as other sectors for which the country has relative advantages continually serves public needs.
It is important to note, that technological opportunities are unpredictable and that uncertainty forces to avoid "undesirable" surprises. No country is willing its national security to be jeopardized since nowadays the cost of failure has proven to be extremely high (e.g., the war between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno Karabakh, the countries have definitely different degrees of preparedness to the war) and the imperative to prevent the country from "technological obstacles" has generated the idea of maintaining technological superiority in the armed forces. It helps to assess the offers of the market and as Cowan admits, "experimenting long after a market would have standardized on one technology" (Cowan & Foray, 851-868). In any of the possible scenarios we need to support the idea of continuous learning and improvement, since it will help later on to adopt to the technologies for civilian security and avoid unpredicted hindrances. The economic aspect of the issue lies in the fact, that no economic growth matters much if security challenges are neglected. And the winners are the countries that have defense industry as a part of their economy. On the one hand they are self-sufficient in the security maintenance, on the other hand, they create workplaces, promote R&D, support economic relations with the importer countries. One of such examples is Turkey. The defense industry of the latter is on its rise. Such countries as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) are among the main importers of military equipment. SIPRI noted that Turkey's share of global arms market has doubled during the period from 2018 to 2022 reaching 1.1 percent of global arms exports (SIPRI, Trends in International Arms Transfers, 2022). Some part of the advancement is related to the adoption of new era of unmanned vehicles and their expanded production which is another power multiplier suggested by technology (SIPRI, Trends in International Arms Transfers, 2022).
Not only western countries but also Russia, India, China, Brazil have put stresses on military defense industry, thus we may suggest that the countries with military ambitions that also have somewhat enough funds are dedicated to have big share of defense budget and hence dictate their own imperatives (within the framework of global economy). US as a "big" player has also undergone certain policy changes regarding the defense and security systems. Under the secretary Donald Rumsfeld (2001-2006) US started its volumes transformations in the military defense industry.
Specifically, US military emphasized the acquisition of the following capabilities:
- Implement networked organism of command, control, communications, computing, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (C4ISR) of systems,
- weapons and platforms,
- Underlined the significance of situational awareness during the war periods and beyond,
- Signified the speed, agility, flexibility and accurateness of the military operations,
- Highly appreciated jointness and interoperability. Thus, many other countries had to take the conceptual cues and consequently follow the US efforts to transform its military forces. As an indicator for future changes countries take different prisms of cooperation. Western Europe tends to take the changes and transformations through the prism of transatlantic defense cooperation and are conscious for the "pressures" form US defense suppliers (enabling cloud-centric zero trust security for defense environments).
Thus, the vast majority of the countries try to process measurements that will support their readiness for the possible threats considering the situational changes dictated by modern technologies. Wars have shown light upon the power's influence and readiness for wars among the countries that are currently at conflicts/ wars (namely Russia and Ukraine, Armenia and Azerbaijan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Great Lakes, etc.). Thus, we may assume that technological advancement affects political power and economic decisions (on whether or not to fund R&D, whether or not be self-sufficient on defense industry, etc.)
As a result, these armed conflicts serve as catalysts for both participating parties and the rest of the countries (especially at the potential risk of wars) use it to reshape their military capabilities.
On the other hand, the uncertainty over the geopolitical issues and their possible consequences has made it of crucial importance to keep the pulse of technological changes (as a driving force for wars). The timely addressed compound problem of technological and resource strengthening, however, helps to somehow preserve the balance of cooperation in an optimal way.
In addition, those countries that consider their development within the ongoing technological changes will eventually experience positive effects of multioperation in other economic sectors that supply armed forces in carrying out its missions. Similarly, this concept has been underlined in the study "Transforming the Defense Industrial base: A Roadmap" by the Office Under Secretary of Defense for industrial Policy (OUSD/IP). It had in the core, that the clusters serving both civilian and defense purposes should form the basis for the national industry thus magnifying the power projection. Thus, the smaller and medium size enterprises that formerly did not supply directly to defense industry, then had the chance to become a part of the industrial-technological advancement (Bitzinger & Richard, 1-11).
Peacetime as the Best Time to Prepare for Potential Wars
During the peacetime it is indeed hard to draw countries' resources (especially when they are scarce) to the potential asymmetric threats and risks. As Donald Rumsfeld (then U.S. Secretary of Defense) stated, "our challenge in this new century is a difficult one: to defend our nation against the unknown, the uncertain, the unseen, and the unexpected" (Rumsfeld, 20-32). Once more proving that the changeableness of the
century and the unpredictable course of the technological advancement has prepared soil for new strategic way of defense thinking.
Revolution in the military defense industry is not only about high-tech weapons but also about processing new doctrines that will successfully employ old and modern systems. Except for ethnic problems that eventually lead to armed conflicts, there is an uncertainty regarding the identifiable enemy (since often countries do not fight against each other directly but use smaller countries for fulfilling their political or other ambitions). Thus, the organizational adaptability and flexibility for orientating towards new missions need to be planned in advance.
So why is it important to constantly finance R&D and get ready for potential wars during the peacetime? Firstly, because the enemies have the chance to access top modern technologies in the open global market, thus enhancing their military capabilities and there arises a question who will be the "fast runner" in the technological marathon. Secondly, the advancement in technologies (not only serving military purposes) definitely has its undeniable impact on the military balance, i.e., if the country starts "running" faster in regard of other technological implications then it has all the chances to easily convert its civilian capabilities into military ones and vice versa. Third, new technologies allow to avoid the traditional problem regarding the quantitative superiority due to their mass effect capabilities. The wars of the recent years have shown that the opponents are not going to challenge each other with the same weapons but are targeting the weaknesses that either side shows (e.g., the 4-day war between Armenia and Azerbaijan threw light upon the sides' warfare and had its direct impact on the 44-day war in 2020).
Yet along with the asymmetrical threat there are still symmetrical ones and countries cannot refuse classical armament as it still remains important. The overemphasis on technology may result in underestimating other low-tech industry by which opponents could respond to either country's technological supremacy (e.g., Chechnya and Russia conflict, where Chechnya despite its obvious low potential over Russia managed to set some of its missions).
Security - a Joint Purpose
Investing in the security market serves the purpose of "homeland" security that ensures that the rest of the economic sectors are guaranteed for longevity. Thus, the idea of a more secure world has become one of the missions that EU, UN and other organizations. In 2003 governing by the security strategy "For a Secure Europe, in a better world" European Commission has processed a research program on the topic (Centers for European policy networks). The program was planned to be implemented with a Group of Personalities (defense actors, including four main European defense firms (EADS, BAE Systems, Thales and Finmeccanica).
Thus, the European Commission decided to start a research program on security and signify the importance of establishing peace elsewhere. As part of the program, the Commission gathered a Group of Personalities, whose role would be to identify needs and research priorities and provide concrete recommendations for fulfilling the initial purpose of the research.
The Group of Personalities (experts of the field) has admitted that technology was the central component to the security, but still, "Technology itself cannot guarantee
security, but security without the support of technology is impossible" (Group of Personalities 6). Back then and nowadays the main ideas were (are) to be able to respond to any kind of threat with a specific type of technology.
The report also proved that civilian and defense industries are in a synergic relation (Group of Personalities 12), i.e., most of the countries prefer to produce dual-use products. Know-hows of both industries serve each other's' commercial purposes. Meanwhile the technological needs of police and military forces are common in certain noticeable aspects as well.
The ideas that UAVs can serve only as a method of mass destruction is also argued in the report, since they can also serve the purpose of maintaining security in the borders by being used by custom authorities. Thus, the interconnection between defense and civil security systems have numerous cross-applications and industries can support in a number of respects.
The fact that EU is an economic union and the challenges that it has decided to take with joint efforts motivates non-member countries join the union or at least make some steps towards it. One of such manifestations is EU-Armenia Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement (EU-Armenia Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement (CEPA)). Thus, we may suggest that no matter of the degree of involvement of defense sector to the civilian one, and no matter how much the countries strive for peace, yet they admit the presence of defense sector as an inseparable part of the countries industry and admit that technologies and challenges based on technology are imperative for new security and defense culture.
Conclusion
Technology has defined the military capabilities after the end of the World War II (even during the war it was already clear that future wars will be different in their nature). During the Cold War period the technological changes and the investment in the sphere was already prioritized. It was mostly conditioned by the vague political situation in the world and uncertainty of relations between countries. R&D of the defense industry gradually resulted in the evolvement of high-tech industry that served not only arm forces' needs but also civilian needs. We may admit that back then the formation of the security market started to reshape into a business model for some of the enterprises. Yet such firms needed to be put under control because of the specific nature of defense and security system. Those transformations have reshaped the economies of the countries for defense as a public good has been "funded" by the overall society (with taxes) and the technological tendencies have resulted in sustainable investment in R&D fields.
Defense has always remained a priority for the vast majority of the countries because if the defense is not properly signified by the state authorities, then the country's security and independence are jeopardized. Previously only the countries with substantial capital could afford having defense industry since defense industry was mainly referred as heavy weaponry but currently the technological advancements have led a new era in defense industry providing an opportunity for the countries with less capital and comparative advantages take certain steps towards creating a tech-driven defense industry. The main investment in this case is the investment in human capital. It logically leads to underlining defense R&D and creates the necessity to fund the field, the outcomes of which is possible to implement not only in defense industry but in other
sectors as well. Meantime tech-oriented defense industry serves as an additional source for income of the country manages to create competitive defense-related equipment not only for domestic needs but for export as well involving also highly-qualified labor force.
The countries that manage to make defense industry a part of their economy have the chance to boost economic growth since defense expenditure being unavoidable take substantial funds especially in those cases when the goods are imported but when high technologies support low- and middle-income countries to evolve defense industry the funds used to obtain defense equipment is like taking out from one pocket and putting into another one.
Currently technology is challenging armed forces with its rapid changes and there arises the issues with public spending and assurance among decision-making political leaders that the investment choices have overseen the future objectively. So, we concluded that the development of military defense industry is often a global challenge within the framework of overall security system, and though the philosophy of peace is essential for countries and organization they all separately strive for "homeland" security first. Countries are prone to take the colossal changes that happen globally and reshape the security even when they are distracted from their state agendas.
REFERENCES
1. Appathurai, James. "NATO Speech: Briefing by NATO Spokesman - MOD - 8 June 2006." 2006. https://www.nato.int/docu/speech/2006/s060608m.htm.
2. Atesoglu, H. Sonmez. Defense Spending Promotes Aggregate Output in the United States: Evidence from Cointegration Analysis. Defense and Peace Economics 13(1), 2002, 55-60.
3. Bitzinger Richard A. "The Revolution in Military Affairs and the Global Defence Industry: Reactions and Interactions." Security Challenges, vol. 4, no. 4, 2008, pp. 1-11. Last accessed 17 Aug. 2023
4.Christos Kollias et al. A Panel Data aAnalysis of the Nexus between Defence Spending and Growth in the European union, Defence and Peace Economics,2007,18:1,75-85, DOI: 10.1080/10242690600722636
5. Cowan Robert and David Foray. "Quandaries in the Economics of Dual Technologies and Spillovers from Military to Civilian Research and Development", Research Policy, 1995, 851-868.
6. D'Agostino, Giorgio et al. Corruption, Military Spending and Growth. Defense and Peace Economics 23(6), 2012, 591-604
7. Dunne Paul and Tian Nan, Military Expenditure, Economic Growth and Heterogeneity. Defense and Peace Economics 26(1), (2015) 15-30
8. Lichtenberg, Frank. "Economics of Defense R&D", Handbook of Defense Economics, Amsterdam, b,1995, 431-57
9. Ross Andrew L. et al. "What Do We Mean by "Transformation"?", Naval War College Review: Vol. 55: No. 1, Article 3. 2002, Available at: https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/nwc-review/vol55/iss1/3/
QbSUMUb УРвУЮ SCIENTIFIC ARTSAKH НАУЧНЫЙ АРЦАХ № 4 (19), 2023
10. Rumsfeld, Donald. "Transforming the Military", Foreign Affairs, 81 (3), 2002, 20-32.
11. Sköns, Elisabeth, et al. "Military Expenditure." In SIPRI Yearbook 2004: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security, 35.
12. Enlargement Countries - statistics on research and development, https://ec.europa .eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Enlargement countries -
statistics on research and development , last accessed 28.11.23
13. Research for Secure Europe, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2004
https://www.cep.eu/fileadmin/user upload/cep.eu/Analysen KOM/KOM 2006 474 D etektionstechniken/Bericht der Gruppe von Persoenlichkeiten vom 15-03-04.pdf, Last accessed: 28 November 2023
14. Security Research, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/security-research.html, Last accessed: 20 November 2023
15. Rise of the TIMBIs: Turkey, India, Mexico, Brazil and Indonesia
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/rise-of-the-timbis-turkey-india-mexico-brazil-and-indonesia/, last access Accessed: 15 October 2023
16. Conflicts to Watch in 2023, https://www.crisisgroup.org/global/10-conflicts-watch-2023, Last accessed: 20 August 2023
17.The Challenge of Adding Governance as a Pillar of Cybersecurity, https://www.c4isrnet.com/, Last accessed: 29 October 2023
18. SIPRI, "Trends in International Arms Transfers", 2022, https://www.sipri.org/publications/2023/sipri-fact-sheets/trends-international-arms-transfers-2022, Last accessed: 14 September 2023
19. Enabling Cloud-centric Zero Trust Security for Defense Environments, https://www.c4isrnet.com/, Last accessed: 5 October 2023
20. EU-Armenia Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement (CEPA) https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/armenia/eu-armenia-comprehensive-and-enhanced-partnership-agreement-cepa en, Last accessed: 05 November 2023
иг^зпьъирьгпь^зпьъс, ЧЬР^ЫФПЮПЧ Sb^LnLn^hU4ÜL UUPSU^PUMbPLbPC ЬЧ ЧРЫЪЗ и2ЧЬ8ПГ©3ПГЪС
SLSbUÜ4ÜL ÜÖh 4PU
О-ЗПЬиъиРи 4ULhbL3UL
^шhpшщbmnLp■Jшh щЬтшЦшЪ С/шпшЦшришЬ/ шЦшц.Ьфш]р С/шпшЦшрсТши
шфрпЬр шищрршЪт, д. Ърк.шЪ, ^ш]шитшир ^шhpшщbmnLp■JnLh
УпплпьЪшрЬпш^шЪ ^прппп^ hЬqш2П2ЦшЪ u|ШJЦшЪЪЬпnLЦ, ипршпш^^шир щш^шЪшЦппЦшЬ, щшmЬпшqJUЬп^ ЦшпЦшЪ Ь^шЪш^ЪЬпо 4sпnL4 фп^ЦЬ[ ЬЪ: ршqЦшp^Ц ^ЪфпЪЬп ЬЪ шпш2шдпЬ qLnpшl
щш2mщшЪпLpJшЪ шщшqшJFl hшЦшП ЬЪрищп^пЦ nшqЦш4шЪ ^шгспцдЪЬп^ фnфnfanLpJnLШЬп, Ъпп nшqJшЦшпnLpJnLЪЪЬп^ ^ш^ЦЪЬп, пппЪр и^^Ц ЬЪ и 2шппьЪш^^ ЬЪ о^Ь ьп^пъьпь sЪmЬuпLpjпLЪЪЬп^ Цпш:
Яп^ЦшЭД Ъщштш^Ъ t pшgшhшJmЬL щи^тщшЪш^шЪ ^ЪфпЪЬпо, пппЪр h^JЪЦшb ЬЪ mЬ^lЪnLnq^ш4шЪ ЪЦшбпLJUЬп^ Цпш, пппЪдпЦ щш^шЪшЦппЦшЬ t тЪтЬиш^шЪ шбр, и оЪ^&Ь щи^тщшЪш^шЪ ФЯФЧУ-ЪЬп^ ^шпипп^^пьй^:
Яп^Цш^Ц фтшп^ЦшЬ ^ЪфпЪЬпо h^JUш4шЪnLЦ ЦЬпшрЬппLЦ ЬЪ ^шЦшЪш^ш^д шЪЦmшЪqпLpJшЪ ЦшпmшhпшЦЬпЪЬп^ 2п2шЪш^Ц щи^тщшЪш^шЪ шпш2штшп шпQJnLЪшpЬпnLpJшЪ и тЪтЬиш^шЪ шб^ Цпш ЦЬп2^Ъ^и шqQЬgnLpJшЪ nLunLJЪшu^пnLpJшЪQx hш2ф шпЪ^пЦ Ъши шJL ЬпфЪЬп^ фпп^о:
«Ф^риЦшЬ» uu|шnЪшL^pЪЬп^ идЬЪшпЪЬпЪ шJLUu ппп2^ ^ЬЪ щштЬпо^ЦЪЬп^ ЬшЦшп, ршЪ^ пп ^ппт^ шпшq фnфnfanLpJnLЪЪЬпQ hш4шЦшпmnLpJnLЪ^g Ьп^ЪЬп^Ъ
ит^и^Ц ЬЪ шЦ^^ ^шЪ^штЬи^^ LhЪЬL фЦ|шЪд Ъ^штЦшЦр: УЬп ^ЪфпЪ t nLunLJЪшu^пЬL mЬ^ЪnLnq^ш4шЪ фпфп^^^пьЪЪЬп^ ЦшпmшhпшЦЬпЪЬпQ и Ьп^ЪЬпК ^пшЪд hшпЦшпЦЬLnL 4шппqпLpjпLЪQ: SЬ^lЪпLпq^шЪЬп^ шqQЬgnLpjшЪ тш^ qmЪЦпq щи^тщшЪш^шЪ шпПJпLЪшрЬппLpJшЪ ^ЪфшЪпш^шЪ щшт^ЬпО ти^ hшЦшп фпшгсЦЬ t q^mш4шЪ шритпш^д^ш^ ЦЬрп^, ^и|Ьи Ъши ^пш^шЪшдЦЬ t рЦифЪ ппп2 mЦJШLЪЬп^ ршЪш^ш^шЪ и ппш^ш^шЪ цЬпLnL&nLpjnLЪ:
Ц]ищ^ипЦ пLuпLJUшu^ппLpJпLЪQ ршgшhшJmпLЦ t, пп nшqЦш4шЪ щш2mщшЪnLpJшЪ hЬm ^шщЦшЬ ^шЦшЪш^шфд mЬfaЪпLпq^шЪЬп^ ^шпипп шгсшЪйЪи^шт^^пьЪЪЬпо, пппЪр 4шщnLЦ ЬЪ Цшп^шЪд, qЬЪpЬпQ, иЬЪиппЪЬпо, шпhЬumш4шЪ ршЪш4шЪnLpjшЦр ппп2пLJUЬп 4шJшgЪЬLnL hшЦшп Ъш^штЬиЦшЬ uшпeшЦnпnLJUЬпD, ^ ЦЬп2П hшЪqЬgЪnLЦ ЬЪ шпшqпLpJшЪ, hшЦшdшЦшgЦшЪ и qшЪqЦшbшJ^Ъ tфЬ4mЪЬпh qquф шб^, ^щЬи Ъши шШЬпрЬ|^ и^Ьд^^пьЪ ЬЪ пьЪЬЪ^Ц ЬпЦпЬ sЪmЬuпLpJшЪ Цпш:
Я^иишршпЬрл щш2шщшUnL^JnLU, mUmbunLpJnLU, шUЦmшUqnLpJnLU, тЬ^Ьп[пд^ш, hbmшqnmnLp■JnLU и qшpqшgnLd, |vшqшqnL^JnLU, q^UЦш6 nLdbp::
ТЕХНОЛОГИЧЕСКИЕ ВЫЗОВЫ, ФОРМИРУЮЩИЕ ОБОРОННУЮ ПРОМЫШЛЕННОСТЬ, И ИХ ВЛИЯНИЕ НА ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКИЙ РОСТ
ГЮЛЬНАРА ДАНИЕЛЯН
аспирант кафедры управления Академии государственного управления Республики Армения г.Ереван, Республика Армения
Оснащенные технологическими инновациями способы ведения войн в наши дни кардинально изменились, особенно после 4-й промышленной революции. Технологии поднимают множество вопросов для будущего глобальной обороны, начиная от изменений в военных структурах до стратегий, которые в конечном итоге влияют на экономику стран в целом. Цель нашей статьи - раскрыть некоторые проблемы обороны, основанные на технологических достижениях, которые служат
движущими силами экономического роста, и подчеркнуть важность оборонных исследований и разработок.
Проблемы, рассматриваемые в статье, в основном относятся к изучению оборонной промышленности в рамках современных вызовов безопасности и их общего влияния на экономический рост (с учетом применимого опыта других стран).
Сценарии «фиксированных» угроз больше не являются определяющими для войн, поскольку быстрые изменения в военной сфере заставляют страны, вовлеченные в военные конфликты, быть более предсказуемыми в отношении друг друга. Наша задача состоит в изучении вызовов, связанных с технологическими изменениями, и способности стран адаптироваться к ним. Чтобы дать целостную картину оборонной промышленности, оснащенной технологиями, мы использовали метод научной абстракции, также провели количественный анализ данных и качественный анализ взаимосвязи между обороной и экономикой.
Таким образом, исследование показало, что важные особенности современных технологий, связанных с военной обороной, которые связывают людей, оружие, датчики, платформы, оборудование для принятия решений на основе искусственного интеллекта и в конечном итоге приводят к значительному увеличению скорости, синхронизации и обеспечивают массовые эффекты, бесспорно оказывают влияние на экономику страны.
Ключевые слова: оборона, экономика, безопасность, технологии, исследования и разработки, мир, вооруженные силы.
