Belfer Center Home > Publications > Academic Papers & Reports > Journal Articles > Military Primacy Doesn't Pay (Nearly As Much As You Think)

EmailEmail   PrintPrint Bookmark and Share

"Military Primacy Doesn't Pay (Nearly As Much As You Think)"

U.S. Air Force F-16 Fighting Falcons based at Kunsan Air Base, South Korea, prepare for the first flight of exercise Red Flag-Alaska 12-1 at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska, Oct. 7, 2011.
SSgt Christopher Boitz

"Military Primacy Doesn't Pay (Nearly As Much As You Think)"

Journal Article, International Security, volume 38, issue 1, pages 52-79

Summer 2013

Author: Daniel W. Drezner

Belfer Center Programs or Projects: Quarterly Journal: International Security



A common argument among scholars and policymakers is that America’s military preeminence and deep international engagement yield significant economic benefits to the United States and the rest of the world. Ostensibly, military primacy, beyond reducing security tensions, also encourages economic returns through a variety of loosely articulated causal mechanisms. A deeper analytical look reveals the causal pathways through which military primacy is most likely to yield economic returns: geoeconomic favoritism, whereby the military hegemon attracts private capital in return for providing the greatest security and safety to investors; direct geopolitical favoritism, according to which sovereign states, in return for living under the security umbrella of the military superpower, voluntarily transfer resources to help subsidize the costs of hegemony; and the public goods benefits that flow from hegemonic stability. A closer investigation of these causal mechanisms reveals little evidence that military primacy attracts private capital. The evidence for geopolitical favoritism seems more robust during periods of bipolarity than unipolarity. The evidence for public goods benefits is strongest, but military predominance plays only a supporting role in that logic. While further research is needed, the aggregate evidence suggests that the economic benefits of military hegemony have been exaggerated in policy circles. These findings have significant implications for theoretical debates about the fungibility of military power and should be considered when assessing U.S. fiscal options and grand strategy for the next decade.


Full Text:


For more information about this publication please contact the IS Editorial Assistant at 617-495-1914.

For Academic Citation:

Drezner, Daniel W. "Military Primacy Doesn't Pay (Nearly As Much As You Think)." International Security 38, no. 1 (Summer 2013): 52-79.

Bookmark and Share

Events Calendar

We host a busy schedule of events throughout the fall, winter and spring. Past guests include: UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, former Vice President Al Gore, and former Soviet Union President Mikhail Gorbachev.