Paul Mason wrote:
“Borrowing money to spend on defence buys you good, high-skilled jobs; enhanced R&D; resilience in the face of a bad world situation and — if you do it right — rekindles social cohesion. It also demands an industrial policy”
This is often said. However “defence” spending represents rather poor value for money by the metric of capital invested/job created compared with any other sector. Policymakers sincere about minimising unemployment should know this. “Defence” R&D may indeed produce interesting work (the internet…), but if it remains unpublished/classified, as is likely, then again, greater public benefit would be obtained by investment elsewhere.
That said, the autonomy of the Baltic states and of Europe in general is worth defending. You’re surely right to be thinking about military solutions. After all, invading eastern Europe has always gone so well for anyone who’s tried it in the past.
Or maybe the UK should try to avoid appearing like a warmongering blimp-head manoeuvring on the borders of a country whom history grants every right to wariness.
Still, the UK can always resort to selling the exploding fruits of such excellent policy to oppressive regimes around the world. How’s that working out for ya?