Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

An arms race may be defined as a pattern of competitive acquisition of military capability between two or more countries. The term arms race is often used quite loosely to refer to any military buildup or spending increases by a group of countries. This definition requires that there be a competitive nature to this buildup, often reflecting an adversarial relationship. The arms race concept is also used fruitfully in other fields, especially evolutionary biology; however, this entry deals only with military arms races.

Examples of Arms Races

One example of an arms race is the “Dreadnought” arms race between Germany and Britain prior to World War I. In the early 20th century, Germany as a rising power sought to challenge the United Kingdom's traditional naval dominance. In 1906, Britain launched a new, more advanced warship, HMS Dreadnought, triggering a naval arms race. Between 1909 and the outbreak of World War I in 1914, Britain launched a further 19 “dreadnoughts” and a further nine battle cruisers, while Germany launched 13 dreadnoughts and five battle cruisers. This arms race is often cited as one of the causes of World War I.

The Cold War nuclear arms race between the United States and the Soviet Union is another example of a 20th-century arms race. The United States' use of nuclear weapons to end World War II led to a determined effort by the Soviet Union to acquire these weapons, leading to a long-running nuclear arms race between the two superpowers. The Soviet Union conducted its first nuclear test in 1949. At the end of 1956, the United States had 2,123 strategic warheads to the Soviet Union's 84. These numbers increased rapidly over the subsequent 30 years. The U.S. arsenal peaked in 1987 at 13,002 warheads, the Soviet Union 2 years later at 11,320 (figures from Stockholm International Peace Research Institute). The end of the Cold War effectively ended this arms race.

Arms races may involve a more general competitive acquisition of military capability. This is often measured by military expenditure, although the link between military expenditure and capability is often quite weak. Such more general arms races are often observed among countries engaged in enduring rivalries, which may sometimes appear to follow each other's military spending levels, especially during periods of heightened tension. Examples of such arms races include India–Pakistan, Israel–Arab states, Greece–Turkey, and, since 1991, Armenia–Azerbaijan.

Consequences of Arms Races

Arms races are frequently regarded as negative occurrences in both economic and security terms.

Large-scale arms acquisitions require considerable economic resources. If two countries spend large sums of money just to cancel out each other's efforts, the expenditure might well be seen as wasted. There is, however, considerable debate surrounding the economic effect of military spending. Some argue that it provides benefits through technological spin-offs, job creation, and infrastructure development; others argue that it displaces more productive forms of investment, while its final output is not itself productive. Certainly, countries that must import arms will see more negative economic effects of an arms race, and arms imports are a major contributor to Third World debt. Even for arms-producing countries, excessive military expenditure is likely eventually to have negative economic consequences. The Soviet Union's economic difficulties were certainly exacerbated by the very high proportion of the gross domestic product devoted to the arms race.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading