The risks of a war economy mentality

This op-ed was first published in Dagens Næringsliv 08.01.2026.

Norway is concerned with bolstering its own security in a more dangerous world. But a war mentality can also undermine the societal resilience we need to secure at home. 

Over the past year, it has become increasingly clear that Europe's security policy must stand on its own two feet going forward. It is also clear that our common security depends on more than military capacity. In its 2025 National Security Strategy (NNS), the new US Trump administration’s policy towards Europe is to "cultivate resistance" to our political stability and societal values. The NNS reminds us that the most serious threat we face, from both the US and Russia, is a war about our political and social values. Both will invest significantly in the coming months and years to undermine our social cohesion. In response, we need to strengthen and maintain the European democratic tradition - as well as the rule of law and the basic values ​​on which our Norwegian society is based. The US intervention in Venezuela and the threats against Greenland confirm that the NNS is not just another policy, but a good indication of Trump's geopolitical strategy. 

Too much focus on the military threat can draw our attention away from this underlying political strategy. NATO countries have committed to increasing defense spending to five percent of gross domestic product. This commitment is based on deterrence theory, where the logic is that increased investment in defense will deter hostile powers. However, an increase in defense spending by one state often leads to other states doing the same. Such a dynamic can trigger an arms race, create distrust, and end-up increasing the risk of armed conflict, even if no one wanted war in the first place. Research suggests that a significant increase in defence spending can create a higher probability of armed conflict. 

In a casino, the table always win in the end. Likewise, a war economy mentality can lock a society into a self-reinforcing loop where everything is seen through a security lense. A recent report from the UN Secretary-General warns that “over time, the entrenchment of defense-oriented economies fosters networks of political, economic and social influence that are primarily dedicated to maintaining high military spending.” A war economy mentality can limit our ability to create the society we want, even beyond the mere financing – or underfinancing – of various budget items. A significant increast in defence spending can weaken our ability to prioritize other policy areas.

An illustrative example of democratic erosion is the predictable increase in the risk of corruption when dealing with the procurement of high-cost military equipment. Ukraine provides a recent example that demonstrate how large procurement deals increase this risk. In the wake of the summer's large demonstrations in support of an independent Ukrainian anti-corruption authority, the same authority uncovered how a group of military personnel, politicians, bureaucrats and businessmen inflated the price of drones to an artificially high level in order to profit from the difference.

 Norway is also not immune to questionable procurement processes. In August, the government anounced that Norway was purchasing protective masks worth 100 million kroner to protect Ukrainian soldiers in the field. VG revealed significant flaws when they tested the product. While the mask protected against simple dust particles, it did not protect against toxic substances such as tear gas. The government has suspended the purchase following these reports. This and other cases demonstrate why greater transparency in defence procurement is important. Dagens Næringsliv recently reported on an internal audit report from the Armed Forces that documented 4.8 billion kroner in purchases from 2016 to 2023 that did not adhere to standard approval processes. Several of the purchases may be illegal. Chief of Defence Erik Kristoffersen has described the Armed Forces as "an open and honest organisation" in Aftenposten. The defense magazine Forsvarets forum can hardly imagine a less apt description, describing an "ingrained culture of secrecy and secrecy".

 As in many other countries, the Norwegian Armed Forces have room for exceptions to normal transparency rules when purchasing for reasons of national security and preparedness. However, extensive secrecy – especially about procurements that did not go according to plan or followed laws and regulations – weakens democratic trust not only in defence, but also in civilian oversight mechanisms and thus the political system as a whole.

 What can be done? Three factors are central to mitigating the negative unintended consequences of a sudden increase in defence spending: resilience, cooperation and interdependence.

 From a European perspective, the goal of resilience to conflict and unrest must be broader than military preparedness alone. Not only must society be protected from armed conflict and other external threats, but also from the negative social consequences of inaprapropriate or unlawful defense spending for the rest of society. This means, among other things, that defence spending must be guided by dialogue, extensive transparency and civil scrutiny. At the same time, we must invest in free media and research that critically examines and provides independent analysis of a rapidly growing defence sector.

 The significant weakening of international cooperation pose a risk to Norway’s security. We need a concerted effort to reverse the trend towards an increasingly insecure world. While recent geopolitical trends point towards deglobalization, we still live in a highly interconnected world. The crises caused by climate change, the COVID-19 pandemic, and Russia’s war in Ukraine, all illustrate that our food systems, public health systems, and various other supply chains are now globally interconnected. Strong international cooperation is in Norway’s strategic interest, and should be prioritized accordingly, including fiscal policy.

 We are interdependent. These interconnected challenges require more, not fewer, global governance structures. Despite the lawless behavior of the great powers, the vast majority of states remain loyal in their commitment to a strong rule-based multilateral system. The challenge lies in mobilizing this majority to challenge the idea that might makes right. To build such coalitions, Norway must invest resources both in cooperation across borders and in updating how a small Scandinavian country relates to and practices dialogue with the rest of the world. For example, a coalition of European countries has secured vital support for Ukraine in negotiations with the United States and Russia. Greenland and Denmark need similar diplomatic action.

 A sudden significant increase in the defense spending can become a self-fulfilling prophecy if not balanced with a comprehensive approach to maintaining international peace and security. This will require an increase in efforts to build societal resilience and sustain peace, both internationally and here at home.