Dear Thomas

I hope you allow me to respond to you in English. While my German is getting better, I will be better able to elaborate in English.

Thank you for your question. The question about capability building, or arms race, or any kind of investment into military structures as a strategy for the prevention of war or building of peace is one of the most central questions in the study of international politics.

Deterrence

It is usually framed as a central part of what is called a ‘realist’ tradition of thought. This school of thought focuses on what is considered material capabilities. That means, in simple terms, a focus on the ability to win a war or a conflict through military means, or other more traditional forms of power. It is this tradition of thought that sees the arms race, or the building of military capabilities as necessary for the ability to deter, or to frighten one’s opponents in order to stop them from attacking you.

Relationships

This school of thought is then contrasted with what is called an ‘idealist’, or an ‘institutional’ position, which rather than emphasizing the importance of military means, weaponry, bombs, intelligence systems, etc., highlights the importance of institutions such as diplomacy, or civil society for the prevention of war and violence and the strengthening of the prospects for peace. Here, the UN plays a major role, or bilateral diplomatic relationships and centers the role of mutual dependencies. These can be economic relationships such as trade, or cultural relationships such as language or religion. Basically, what is important here is that conflict and war is not seen to be prevented through deterrence – what I think in German is ‘Abschreckung’ – but rather through the depending of relationships that either already exist between countries, diplomatic relationships, trade relationships, or historically built relationships, in order to prevent, or solve violent conflicts.

Who answers?

So, to your question if an arms race is the only way to keep the peace internationally, the answer would be that it depends on who you ask. A realist would say yes, since the main resource in world politics is power and particularly material power, and an institutionalist would say no, emphasizing that an arms race does not prevent a conflict, but rather that it makes it more probable.

There are many other perspectives on the role of arms and violence and if you are interested in the theoretical backdrop to all of this, I would recommend you have a look at one of the many introductions to International Relations where you will find a great deal of more substance and examples. One example is the Introduction to International Relations, edited by R. Devetak and D. R. McCarthy (2024).

All the best,

Maria

Devetak, R., & McCarthy, D. R. (Eds.). (2024). An Introduction to International Relations (4th ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Link