On the exhibition grounds just outside of Paris: a barren landscape, mounds of earth and silence. Suddenly, the deafening noise of engines, tanks driving across the scene, shots being fired and smoke rising. Loudspeakers comment on the passing spectacle like a sporting event with names, technical data, equipment advantages mentioned in meticulous detail. The audience, seated on a covered stand, watches the fight scene with fascination, and at the end there is enthusiastic applause. After the live demonstrations, audience members approach the protagonists, engage in conversation and marvel at the weaponry up close.

In Beltring, England, there is a very similar situation: tanks drive along a runway, a voice from afar comments on a battle taking its course. Here, too, the audience approaches man and machine in awe at the end. The only difference is that the tanks are from the Second World War, while in Paris the latest war technology demonstrates its combat effectiveness.

In Paris, one of the world's largest arms fairs takes place every two years, and in Beltring, the War and Peace Festival, a large reenactment event, where wars (especially World War II) are reenacted as realistically as possible, runs annually. These two events pursue very different interests but, as described at the beginning, both feature the attraction of live war acts.
These two war game scenes may be marginal phenomena, but I believe that both of them reveal a great fascination for war among us humans. Here, we observe the events of war from a safe vantage point, shuddering with pleasure as we are impressed by the power and force of the machines and the courage of the soldiers. We would like to be there ourselves, just a little bit, and then in the end we are glad not to be involved.

Similar things can be observed when watching war movies or consuming the news. But do we admit this fascination to ourselves? In any case, we humans have developed some mechanisms to reinterpret this fascination in such a way that it can be morally legitimized to some extent. For example, reenactors claim that they wanted to make the horrors of war visible with the aim of deterring people so that it never happens again. You may not really believe them, but they are certainly striving for authenticity when they drive up in their real tanks from the Second World War. After the fake battle is over, they drink a beer and review what happened from a comfortable position. Many also say that it is about a fascination for technology. For a person who is interested in technology, it is undoubtedly something special to get an old tank driving again and to maintain it. But why does it have to be a tank and not a truck? Maybe because it is somehow more interesting to recreate a battle with your old tank and thus be a fictitious part of heroic and historical events? War games without the risk of death?

The mechanism of repression is also manifested everywhere at the arms fair, which is intended to distract from the actual essence of war, namely killing. The arms companies advertise with the most incredible slogans. “Together Ahead” is the motto of the Swiss company Ruag. The Italian arms company Leonardo, whose name goes back to none other than Leonardo da Vinci, advertises on its website with the words: “We work with creativity and passion to develop and deploy advanced technology in the pursuit of security and progress. To deliver value, today and tomorrow”. Blood, mutilation and destruction? No way, who can be against security, progress and creativity?

In any case, since Russia's attack on the Ukraine, the arms industry has undergone a transformation from a Saul to Paul conversion. In one fell swoop, the arms industry has been given the best morally sound arguments. An innocent country with few military resources is attacked by its neighbor, a highly armed nuclear power. If this attack is not stopped, there is a threat of adversity for Europe as well, and democratic values are in danger. So, the Ukraine needs military support, especially since enormous amounts of material and ammunition are being consumed in this intensive war. In addition to America, European countries are also supplying weapons and ammunition, but at the same time they need to replenish their own arsenals. Trump is calling on Europe to invest more in the military. All of this means that the arms industry is defying the moderate economic situation in Europe and enjoying unprecedented demand – a trend that is likely to continue for the next several years. So, if the weapons end up in the hands of the right player, then the moral high ground is easily defended. But who can guarantee that? Who can foresee the course of history? And who can prevent morality from being subordinated to business? Until recently, Russia was still Armenia's protective power, but at the same time it supplied weapons to both Armenia and its enemy Azerbaijan – to name just one example.

Speaking of morals: until Russia invaded Ukraine, Russian arms manufacturers were well represented at Eurosatory, but since then they received a ban from attending. The same applies to Israel, which was banned from participating in 2024 because of the Gaza war. This resulted in a legal wrangle, and it will be interesting to see whether Israel will be represented again in 2026. Nevertheless, Israel's arms industry is booming. In 2023, arms sales abroad reached a new record of 13 billion dollars for the third time in a row. And demand from abroad continues to be high. This is because weapons from Israel are battle-tested – a decisive advantage in the global arms race.

However which way you look at it, there is something abstruse and morally ambiguous about both occasions. Playing at war and selling weapons are both unacceptable! I also had some preconceived ideas about the people whom I might encounter at these events. Of course, I met people on the ground who somehow confirmed these ideas. But what really amazed and shocked me was how normal and matter-of-fact it all seemed. Many of the reenactors were English, some of them attending the festival with their families. Some came from the middle class and worked for a bank or an insurance company. Owning and maintaining a World War II tank is an expensive hobby that only people with the necessary income can afford. Take away the military hardware and delegations, and substitute them with consumer electronics. It would then be a normal trade fair.

And maybe we are just living in a time when war is becoming an “acceptable” means again, or at least has a certain normality. Suddenly, we have to ask ourselves the nagging question of our fitness for war. The headlines “Is the big war coming” or even “Is the Third World War just around the corner” can be read frequently. Perhaps we should be glad as long as the hobby warriors are reenacting the Second World War, because it is unlikely that they would do so if the Third World War were raging.