Capital, Markets & Influence
Studies show that states classified as “weak” often lack the ne- cessary means to acquire this equipment and technology, which exposes them to external threats or internal destabilizations. These destabilizations can lead to internal conflicts, such as the civil wars that many populations have had to endure over the past twenty years. Thus, it is imperative that states are able to effectively fulfill their security mission. Regarding your question about ethics, it is essential to approach it from a temporal perspective. Over the past twenty or thirty years, countries that are now considered state enemies were once close allies. This dynamic makes ethics difficult to measure. Let’s take a concrete example: a country X that receives military assistance or a country Y providing defense systems can quickly become an enemy depending on geopolitical developments, changes in internal policy, sovereign decisions, or new alliances. This observation is evident in recent conflicts over the last five years. Russia, once a major player in international politics, is now perceived as an enemy under sanctions. It is possible that, in a few years, it may regain its status as an ally with certain European or American countries. Another example is Iran, which was an ally of the West until 1979, prior to the Islamic Revolution. Other countries also show variations in their alliances throughout history—we can also talk about Saddam Hussein, Mobutu, etc.—which were one day allies and friends of the West and became evil at some point in history. Thus, ethics in these contexts is complex to evaluate and can evolve with circumstances. Kamil: With rapid advancements in drone systems, missile technologies, and AI-driven defense platforms, what role should private investment holdings play—deterrence, protection, or strategic technological leadership? Alexandre: We are addressing a major topic that has been discussed for over fifteen years with stakeholders in the global defense industry. The rapid evolution of political decisions and global conflicts makes it difficult for states to keep pace with the necessary funding to innovate and industrialize defense systems. For more than fifteen years, we have developed funding programs for the defense industry, including operational units in Saudi Arabia and several countries in Asia and Europe. We encourage industrial players to turn to the private sector in order to quickly access fresh capital. This allows them to develop factories, systems, conduct research and innovations, and optimize their supply chains. The war in Ukraine has revealed that, despite efforts to accelerate the provision of defense systems, many European industrial players were ill-prepared. Currently, although the funding cycle is often highlighted in the media, some industrial players still have not received the necessary funds. This underscores the difficulties faced in developed economies, where demagogic and political reasons lead to promises of quick decisions and funding, often hampered by internal bureaucracy.
During conflicts, I was surprised to see that some investments made a few years earlier in defense, interception, radar detection, or pharmaceutical companies were suddenly called upon. When a conflict broke out in a country, our partner was contacted by government agencies to activate its systems and applications. It is interesting to note that these systems and services, initially designed for other purposes, were repurposed to support armed forces or populations. This improvised use led to positive feedback, allowing for improvements and upgrades to the systems. Thus, it contributed to the massive development of products, their deployment, and an increase in the revenues of the concerned company. Kamil: Your investment portfolio includes involvement in advanced security and defense technologies. How do you balance innovation in this sector with ethical responsibility and long-term global stability? Alexandre: This question of responsibility in the defense sector to us often arises in debates, conferences, and parliamentary sessions. To illustrate this, let’s take the example of a bar owner accused of serving too much alcohol to customers, which can lead to car accidents. This raises a reflection on the responsibility of the user, rather than the provider, regarding the goods and services offered to states and the population. It is crucial to note that defense is essential for all countries. Every state has a duty to protect its population and must therefore have adequate equipment, services, and systems to ensure its safety.
DAVOS CLUB 35
Powered by FlippingBook