While conventional wisdom portrays war as universally destructive, a prominent political economist reveals how conflict can paradoxically generate significant benefits for certain groups. According to David Keen, warfare often creates complex economic and political incentives that extend far beyond traditional military objectives.
Keen's analysis challenges the simplistic view of war as a zero-sum game, demonstrating instead how it can become a self-perpetuating system with its own internal logic. "Conflict frequently establishes alternative economies where violence becomes a form of capital," he explains. "These shadow economies can reward those who control resources, weapons, or territory in ways that peace cannot."
Beyond immediate financial gains, Keen identifies how war serves political survival strategies for various actors. "For some leaders, ongoing conflict provides justification for maintaining emergency powers, suppressing opposition, and consolidating control," he notes. "The chaos of war can mask governance failures while creating dependency on those who promise security."
This perspective helps explain why some conflicts persist despite apparent opportunities for resolution. "When multiple parties benefit from continued instability—whether through resource extraction, arms sales, or political leverage—peace becomes economically disadvantageous for them," Keen observes.
The analysis suggests that understanding these hidden incentives is crucial for effective conflict resolution. "We must recognize that for some participants, war isn't a problem to be solved but a profitable condition to be maintained," Keen concludes. "Only by addressing these underlying economic and political rewards can we create sustainable alternatives to violence."