Rethinking Post-Industrial Warfare: A Critical Response to The Economist’s Vision
Contemporary debates on the future of warfare increasingly revolve around the question of whether technological innovation—particularly in autonomous systems, additive manufacturing, and AI-driven logistics—can compensate for the erosion of traditional industrial defence capabilities. In an era marked by digital transformation, shrinking arsenals, and modular production models, some argue that large-scale re-industrialisation is no longer necessary for military preparedness or strategic relevance. This position is especially appealing in liberal democracies where economic constraints, political hesitancy, and labour shortages make industrial expansion politically and financially burdensome. Yet, at stake is more than an economic calculus: the underlying issue concerns the structural requirements for credible deterrence, territorial control, and coercive effectiveness in war. If war remains a political act governed by human judgment and enforced through physical force—as Clausewitz and his intellectual successors contend—then any doctrine that privileges technological agility over full-spectrum military capacity risks strategic incoherence. The challenge, therefore, is to determine how new production paradigms can be integrated into, rather than substituted for, the enduring logic of warfare.