We have turned war into an economy. Now we are bearing the consequences. A complex and often cynical reality of the modern world with perpetuation of conflicts, misappropriation of resources, directed innovation, risk of escalation and political influence.

Thus, we pay the consequences:
- Loss of human lives and immense suffering in conflict zones.
- Migration crises and massive population displacements.
- Destruction of infrastructure and cultural heritage.
- Destabilisation of entire regions, which has repercussions on a global scale.
- Economic pressures on national budgets, which must finance armament or reconstruction.
- The climate of fear and insecurity that permeates societies, even far from the battlefields.

For things to change, it would require a radical transformation of global governance and unprecedented political will from the most powerful nations.

Rearmament... This presupposes that we have disarmed, and that we have chosen to arm ourselves again. Not wanting to argue about the implications of the question, I will simply say that one must be ready to defend oneself if attacked. Let's not quibble, it's a universal stance. But be careful: at the level of a nation, it's about having an army that is capable of defending the country and not intended to be integrated into a supranational army with entirely different aims, not to say offensive ones, such as NATO for example! In recent history, we have seen various countries successfully repel massive invasions. It is from these countries that we must draw inspiration when we want to develop a national defence concept. In a word, a country capable of defending itself and whose Constitution excludes it from deploying its troops beyond its borders is certainly the best guarantor of peace that can be conceived.