全文内容
Share Post Share Share Copy Mail Post Views: 121AbstractThis paper examines the evolution, consolidation, and contemporary transformation of the United States military-industrial complex (MIC), with a particular focus on the dominance of the “Big Five” defence contractors—Lockheed Martin, RTX, Boeing, General Dynamics, and Northrop Grumman. It argues that the emergence of this oligopoly was not a natural outcome of market competition, but the result of deliberate state engineering, particularly during the post–Cold War consolidation of the 1990s. The Pentagon’s role in encouraging mergers transformed a previously competitive industrial base into a highly concentrated structure, creating long-term dependencies between the state and a handful of prime contractors.The paper analyses how these firms have translated structural market dominance into political and strategic influence. Through mechanisms such as lobbying, the “revolving door,” and the strategic distribution of supply chains across congressional districts, the Big Five have embedded themselves deeply within the domestic political economy. This has resulted in the institutionalisation of defence spending, where military procurement functions not only as a tool of national security but also as a politically protected system of economic redistribution. At the international level, the study explores how these firms underpin U.S. hegemony through Foreign Military Sales, contributing to alliance structures while simultaneously intensifying global security dilemmas, fuelling arms races, and enabling the prolongation of conflicts.At the same time, the paper situates the MIC within a period of significant technological disruption. The shift from hardware-centric warfare to software-defined, AI-enabled systems has exposed structural inefficiencies in the traditional acquisition model. The rise of venture-backed defence technology firms, such as SpaceX, Anduril, and Palantir—alongside Pentagon initiatives aimed at accelerating innovation and diversifying suppliers, signals an emerging challenge to the legacy oligopoly. However, rather than a complete displacement of established contractors, the analysis suggests the emergence of a hybrid ecosystem in which traditional firms retain dominance in large-scale platforms while newer actors drive innovation in software, autonomy, and data systems.Ultimately, the paper argues that while technological change is reshaping the modalities of warfare, it does not fundamentally alter the underlying political economy of the MIC. Instead, emerging technologies may reinforce existing structures of power by making military operations more efficient, scalable, and persistent. The study concludes by questioning whether this evolving system will lead to a more accountable and adaptive defence architecture, or whether it will further entrench the structural conditions that sustain continuous military engagement.Click Here to Download Manekshaw PaperFor Upload_MP 134Download Tags: AI-enabled WarfareAlliance StructuresAndurilAutonomous SystemsBig Five Defence ContractorsBoeingConflict ProlongationCongressional District PoliticsContinuous Military EngagementData-driven WarfareDefence Acquisition ReformDefence Industry ConsolidationDefence InnovationDefence OligopolyDefence Political EconomyDefence SpendingEconomic RedistributionForeign Military SalesGeneral DynamicsGlobal Arms RaceHybrid Defence EcosystemLockheed MartinMICMilitary LobbyingMilitary ModernisationMilitary ProcurementNorthrop GrummanPalantirPentagon Innovation InitiativesPentagon ProcurementPost-Cold War MergersRevolving DoorRTXSecurity DilemmaSoftware-defined WarfareSpaceXState EngineeringStrategic CompetitionStructural PowerU.S. HegemonyUnited States Military-Industrial ComplexVenture-backed Defence Startups