Stocktake: The ethical case for arms stocks

Ukraine’s defensive needs show weapons can legitimately be part of ESG investment

A destroyed Ukrainian army tank in the settlement of Gnutovo outside Mariupol in Ukraine. Photograph: Russian defence ministry/AFP via Getty Images
A destroyed Ukrainian army tank in the settlement of Gnutovo outside Mariupol in Ukraine. Photograph: Russian defence ministry/AFP via Getty Images

Should ESG investors be buying arms companies? Until recently, the question might have seemed ridiculous to many. In January, the chief executive of German arms manufacturer Rheinmetall complained his firm could not get credit from domestic banks due to ESG concerns.

Similarly, a leaked version of a draft report commissioned by the European Union into sustainable finance suggested arms firms might be termed “socially harmful”. That prompted complaints from German defence lobbyists, who pointed to Ukraine’s defensive needs as proof that weapons can be part of ESG.

It's impossible to disagree, given the dire scenes in Ukraine. Funding essential military deterrence needs to be on a par with financing social priorities, said prominent Harvard economist Kenneth Rogoff in a Guardian piece last week. It's time for everyone to admit defence spending "is sometimes a necessity, not a luxury".