A-Infos (en) France, OCL CA #356 - Arms Race: What's Renault Doing in This Mess? (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

The Renault automotive group has been approached by the French Ministry 
of the Armed Forces to produce drones. Renault would thus be joining an 
arms race taking place on an international scale. This is a 
controversial issue, especially since, according to the French Chief of 
the Defence Staff, the war in Ukraine could escalate and lead France 
into a "high-intensity conflict." In June 2025, Sébastien Lecornu was 
still Minister of Defence. He had then mentioned an unprecedented 
partnership aimed at bringing together Renault and a defense company to 
produce drones in Ukraine. This announcement sparked surprise and even 
some disbelief, particularly among the automaker's employees. At the end 
of September, Renault's management finally confirmed that it had been 
approached by the Ministry of the Armed Forces to participate in defence 
projects, specifically for the production of drones.
In an internal memo to its employees, Renault's management stated that 
the board of directors had responded favorably to the government's 
request. Renault highlighted "additional activity for its French sites," 
"opening up to civilian applications," and "a profitable economic 
opportunity," while also mentioning a few "points of vigilance," 
including site security against potential threats and caution regarding 
possible disinformation. Is this the crux of the matter?
Renault's management also promised transparent communication with its 
employees to explain the stakes and the precautions being considered. 
When questioned by an employee during a large internal meeting, Philippe 
Brunet, the new Engineering Director, stated that he could not elaborate 
further: he had just signed a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) with the 
French Directorate General of Armaments (DGA).
Renault's arms manufacturing is a source of concern and debate. 
Internally, some employees disapprove of it for ethical reasons, while 
others support it in light of rising international tensions.

Renault factories in Billancourt in 1915
Consensus on increasing military budgets
This announcement comes in an increasingly warlike international 
context, marked in Europe by the war in Ukraine. The French Army Chief 
of Staff is now speaking of "a possible war against Russia." The 
European Commission, for its part, wants to prepare member states for a 
potential "high-intensity" conflict by 2030. All major French media 
outlets, both public and private, are constantly warning about the rise 
of the Russian threat and the need to arm themselves in the face of the 
risk of American disengagement. Fear has always been a powerful tool in 
shaping public opinion.
The European Union sided with Ukraine against the Russian invasion as 
early as 2022, notably by providing it with weapons. But since taking 
office in January 2025, the American president and businessman has been 
demanding that European states increase their military budgets and take 
greater responsibility for arming Ukraine... by purchasing weapons from 
American companies.
And it's working. France has approved NATO's new target of increasing 
its military spending to 3.5% of GDP by 2035 (5% if broader security 
spending is included). The 2024-2030 Military Programming Law was 
adopted by the French Parliament in July 2023. This law allocates 
EUR413.3 billion to the armed forces. Equipment supplied to Ukraine is 
not included in the budget as such, which nevertheless provides for 
EUR16 billion in spending to replenish ammunition stocks. In
the National Assembly, the Military Programming Law received 408 votes 
in favor, 87 against, and 53 abstentions. As in the Senate, the 
Communists and La France Insoumise voted against it, criticizing a 
"military strategy serving NATO and the United States" but not the need 
to rearm. The Socialists and Greens abstained, regretting that the main 
budgetary effort was planned for after 2027 and that progress on 
European defense was "far too timid." The centrist groups (MoDem, 
Renaissance, Horizons, etc.), the Republicans (LR), and the National 
Rally (RN) voted in favor, while also expressing regret that France's 
military buildup was not more substantial. The Minister of the Armed 
Forces assured them that this law would establish minimum spending 
levels, not a maximum threshold.
Indeed. In July 2025, Emmanuel Macron announced his intention to 
increase the defense budget by EUR3.5 billion for 2026, in addition to 
the EUR3.2 billion already allocated by the Military Programming Law. 
This would bring the defense budget to EUR57.2 billion, compared to 
EUR50.5 billion in 2025 (+13%). And the same plan is set for 2027. 
Emmanuel Macron's ambition is to double the defense budget during his 
two terms, increasing it from EUR32.2 billion in 2017 to EUR63.4 billion 
in 2027. This is in line with NATO's objectives of EUR120 billion 
(equivalent to 3.5% of current GDP), and potentially EUR172 billion (5% 
of GDP) by 2035. These billions in additional military spending are 
included in the 2026 budget currently being debated in Parliament. But 
these measures have not sparked any debate or questioning among members 
of parliament and senators. The increase in the military budget is, 
however, higher than the cost of suspending the pension reform, which is 
supposedly unsustainable given the growing burden of public debt.
Where will the government find these billions? Not in the pockets of the 
"ultra-rich" or the major shareholders holding the infamous "business 
assets," the taxation of which would jeopardize the French economy. 
Rather, it will come from the pockets of the poorest and the middle 
class, and at the expense of public services. Thus, the 2026 state and 
social security budgets foresee a freeze on social benefits, a reduction 
in healthcare reimbursements, a decrease in the number of civil servants 
and teachers, and cuts to hospitals and education, among other things.

Renault tank production in 1915
To the great benefit of the military-industrial complex
Increased military spending benefits a thriving French arms industry, 
unlike other sectors that are declining (automotive) or have practically 
disappeared (steel, mining, textiles, etc.). The French 
military-industrial complex comprises companies such as Nexter and 
Arquus for land systems, Airbus, Safran, and Dassault for aerospace, 
Thales and Sagem for electronics, Naval Group for naval systems, MBDA 
for missiles, and Eurenco for explosive materials. Their activities are 
overseen by the Directorate General of Armaments (DGA), which monitors 
national programs and ensures the strategic coherence of research and 
development.
This sector is operating at full capacity and is recruiting. France has 
become the world's second-largest arms exporter thanks to a 47% increase 
in exports between 2019 and 2023, largely due to the sale of Rafale 
fighter jets. Each Rafale sells for around EUR80 million, a huge boon 
for Dassault Aviation, which is hiring extensively to meet the surge in 
orders. At the Dassault factory in Martignas, Gironde, a 3,000 m² 
building was constructed two months ago to double production from 20 to 
40 aircraft per year.
In this ranking, France has benefited from Russia's drop to third place. 
Russia has had to concentrate its military production capacity for the 
war in Ukraine, resulting in a 53% drop in its exports over four years. 
The French state could also easily increase its military capabilities if 
the arms industry focused its production on rearmament instead of 
prioritizing exports. But these exports are highly profitable, 
regardless of whether the buyers are regimes as unsavory as Putin's Russia.
Even though Renault produced tanks during the First World War and shells 
for Germany during the Second, there is no industrial need for the 
automaker to produce drones or any other type of weaponry. The French 
military-industrial complex already has sufficient capacity.
In the past, Renault has also produced buses, tractors, and machine 
tools. If the automaker truly wanted to diversify, it could turn to 
other, more useful products, as it did with ventilators and masks during 
the COVID-19 pandemic. It simply needs the resources.

Contemporary Renault BMX 01 armored vehicle "NATO Standard"
From defensive warfare to outright warfare
This increase in military budgets is presented as a necessity to avoid 
war, or its escalation, and to guarantee peace, according to the 
oft-repeated adage, "If you want peace, prepare for war." But has this 
adage ever worked?
Increased military budgets have, in fact, never led to peace. On the 
contrary, the two world wars of the 20th century were preceded by 
massive rearmament. Nor has the theory of nuclear deterrence prevented, 
since the bombing of Hiroshima, the continued existence of equally 
deadly so-called "traditional" wars around the world.
Today, peace in Europe is supposedly threatened by Russian expansionism. 
France and the European Union are therefore said to be in a defensive 
position. A highly subjective viewpoint. The subject of defensive war 
has already been debated in the past. Jean Jaurès, for example, the 
famous socialist deputy of the early 20th century, approved of the 
necessity of "defensive wars" and their necessity when all efforts in 
favor of peace had been exhausted[1].
But "What exactly is a defensive war? Who will decide that it belongs to 
one category or another?" replied Rosa Luxemburg, one of the leaders of 
the German Social Democratic Party at the time[2]. She cited the 
Franco-Prussian War of 1870 as an example. At the height of tensions 
between the two main European powers, Napoleon III's France had declared 
war on Bismarck's Prussia (which later became Germany) following the 
latter's attempt to appoint a Prussian to the Spanish throne. And Rosa 
Luxemburg continued: "Because Bismarck deliberately pushed France into 
the war, Napoleon III's war should, in Jaurès's words, be considered a 
'just' war." But, from a socialist perspective, neither side had the 
right to fight this war. This war was the product of both Napoleon's 
criminal policies and the calculations and plans of a Germany driven by 
blood and iron.
Just as Napoleon III saw France encircled by a Spain in Prussian hands, 
Vladimir Putin justified the invasion of Ukraine by claiming that Russia 
was encircled by NATO countries. Each side thus considers itself to be 
in a defensive position. As for the line between defense and attack, the 
European Union has very quickly moved from sending so-called "defensive" 
weapons to increasingly "offensive" weapons, which are used, in 
particular, to bomb Russian territory, and no longer solely to defend 
Ukrainian territory.
This fratricidal war must be stopped. Our solidarity goes, of course, to 
the Ukrainian people, who are suffering under the Russian invasion that 
began in March 2014 with the annexation of Crimea and part of the 
Donbas. But it also goes to the hundreds of thousands of Russians 
conscripted into the military, many of whom are former conscripts or 
"volunteers" lured by the promise of better wages, and used as cannon 
fodder to serve the interests of the Russian bourgeoisie[3]. "Workers 
have no country," proclaimed Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in 1848. 
This class solidarity must not be reduced to a mere pose.

If you want peace, prepare for revolution
This rise in conflict is unfolding within the context of a new crisis of 
capitalism. In the Western countries where it originated and initially 
developed, the decline in profit rates in the 1970s-this congenital 
tendency of the capitalist system described by Karl Marx-was temporarily 
countered by globalization. But the relocation of production to low-wage 
countries backfired on its instigators and gave rise to serious 
competitors, starting with China. Proponents of free trade suddenly 
converted to protectionism. A tariff war, so dear to Donald Trump, could 
escalate into outright war.
The aggressiveness of capitalists and the states serving them is growing 
with the crisis. Ukraine and the Ukrainian people are thus victims of 
the rivalry between Putin's Russia and NATO countries, including France 
and the United States. Since the fall of the USSR in 1991, each side has 
sought to expand its sphere of influence among the former Eastern Bloc 
countries liberated from Soviet control. Each tries to convince the 
other that they are the aggressor. Information is everywhere controlled 
and used to reinforce this narrative. But aggressors exist on both sides.
In many conflicts, it is futile to try to determine "who started it." 
Competition, trade, economic, and political warfare always begin long 
before weapons are fired. In the event of a conflict between the United 
States and China, for example, can we pinpoint who started encroaching 
on the other's territory?
Even in peacetime, each national bourgeoisie seeks to expand its sphere 
of influence, even resorting to the most underhanded and illegal means. 
"War is merely the continuation of politics by other means," wrote the 
Prussian general Carl von Clausewitz after the Napoleonic Wars, which 
claimed millions of lives in Europe.
Certainly, we are only at the very beginning of a possible march toward 
war. That said, we are witnessing an increasingly irresistible logic 
taking shape: blocs forming, tensions rising, and increasingly 
authoritarian and belligerent governments emerging.
Donald Trump renamed the United States Department of Defense the "War 
Department." He deployed a massive military armada off the coast of 
Venezuela and spoke of resuming nuclear testing. Meanwhile, Russia just 
tested a new nuclear-powered underwater drone, named Poseidon. In 
September 2025, to commemorate Japan's surrender in 1945, China staged a 
show of force during the largest military parade in its history on the 
ironically named "Avenue of Eternal Peace" in Beijing, in the presence 
of Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. Each 
side flexed its muscles.

Renault's decision to produce weapons is part of this broader context of 
rearmament. "Capitalism carries war within it like a cloud carries a 
storm," said Jean Jaurès. If we want peace, what we need right now is 
not to manufacture weapons, but to change the system.

Gilles Seguin, November 1, 2025

Notes

[1]"Any war is criminal if it is not manifestly defensive; and it is 
manifestly and certainly defensive only if the government of the country 
proposes to the foreign government with which it is in conflict that the 
conflict be settled by arbitration." Jean Jaurès in The New Army (1911).
[2]See "Jean Jaurès's New Army" by Rosa Luxemburg on the website 
marxists.org.
[3]The number of victims is a propaganda tool on both sides. According 
to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, an American NGO, 
the conflict resulted in 1 million victims on the Russian side 
(including 250,000 deaths) and 400,000 on the Ukrainian side (including 
60,000 to 100,000 deaths) between February 24, 2022, and May 2025.

https://oclibertaire.lautre.net/spip.php?article4613
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en