We are accustomed to thinking that wars are waged by politicians, generals, ideologues. But in large, protracted, systemic conflicts, decisions are often made where there are neither offices nor flags.
There exist structures that act rationally within the logic of their own functioning but lack the capacity for reflection. They do not stop, even when the overall situation demands it. They continue moving by the inertia of the goals embedded in their design.
We call them actors without will.
These include:
- corporations for which war is a market;
- bureaucracies for which war is authority;
- media for which war is content;
- financial institutions for which war is a risk coefficient in a formula;
- politicians who become a function of their own rhetoric when the fear of losing face matters more than reality;
- the military-industrial complex, for which war is a portfolio of orders.
They bear no ill intent. They have a function. And this function reproduces war without any hatred.
The true machinery of war operates where flows of capital, contracts, and bureaucratic procedures self-replicate conflict. The system is built so that its normal functioning leads to self-destruction. And as long as we search for the “guilty,” the mechanism keeps running.
2. Can a Function Be Changed Without Breaking the Structure?
Actors without will respond only to changes in their conditions of existence. They cannot be persuaded, intimidated, or betrayed. They are immune to pleas, appeals to conscience, or changes in narrative. They respond to one thing: profit.
If we make it so that their existence no longer depends on war, they will begin to seek new niches. They do not care what they produce, as long as money is made.
This is not the naïve “conversion” of the 1990s, when defense plants were abandoned without creating solvent demand. This is a structural reorientation through long-term, large-scale, economically viable peaceful contracts.
The key question: do projects exist that can generate such demand?
The answer is yes. We will examine two in detail: the Black Sea-Danube Corridor and solar hubs in deserts. The first is a transport artery, the second an energy project. Both require technologies already within the military-industrial complex’s capacity, and both can generate order flows for decades.
3. Work Plan: Contracts for Actors Without Will
3.1. Project 1: The Black Sea–Danube Corridor
This involves creating a transport and logistics system connecting Central Asia through the Caspian Sea, the Black Sea, and the Danube with the European internal market — all the way to the port of Antwerp. This is not a theoretical blueprint. The Danube ports (Izmail, Reni, Ust-Danube) tripled their throughput in 2022 despite the war — from 5.5 to 16.5 million tons. The infrastructure has already proven its capacity.
However, for the corridor to become a full-fledged alternative to existing routes, large-scale investments are needed in three key areas:
- Maritime security — permanent naval presence for mine clearance, vessel escort, and war risk insurance. Example: the ASPIDES mission in the Red Sea could serve as a prototype for the Black Sea. Without this, no private investor will enter.
- Eliminating bottlenecks: Iron Gates (Danube) — systematic dredging, coordination of hydropower plant operations between Serbia and Romania, implementation of a “smart navigation” system (dynamic traffic management, 24-hour passage). Gauge breaks (Ukraine’s borders with Romania and Hungary) — introduction of variable gauge systems, allowing trains to switch from the 1520 mm gauge to the European 1435 mm without reloading in 20 minutes. This already operates at the Poland–Lithuania and Spain–France borders.
- Digital corridor — extending the customs transit system (NCTS) to the countries of the Middle Corridor, allowing goods to travel from Aktau to Antwerp with a single declaration.
More details on logistics and investment potential can be found in the separate article “The Black Sea–Danube Corridor.”
3.2. Project 2: Solar Hubs in Deserts
Global energy is moving toward decarbonization. The deserts of the Middle East, North Africa, and Central Asia receive the world’s highest solar irradiation. Building gigawatt-scale solar power plants in these regions, with subsequent energy transport (via hydrogen, HVDC lines, or ammonia), is an infrastructure project comparable in scale to the Suez Canal or transcontinental railways.
Such a project requires:
- steel structures — hundreds of thousands of tons for solar panel frames;
- cable products — for collection and transmission of energy within the plants;
- automation and control systems — for monitoring and grid balancing;
- logistics — for delivering materials to hard-to-reach regions;
- desalination plants — for cleaning panels in the desert (another vast market).
All these are directly within the competence of enterprises currently working for defense. Their technologies (reliability, resistance to extreme conditions, autonomy) are ideally suited for desert environments.
A Real Business Case: Noor Abu Dhabi
The Noor Abu Dhabi solar plant (1.2 GW) became not only a technological but also an economic precedent for the Middle East energy market. Its success rests on three pragmatic factors: minimizing capital costs, scalability, and strategic debt management.
The Economics of a Record-Low Tariff. At the tender stage, the project shocked the market with a price of 2.42 cents per kWh. This profitability was achieved through economies of scale (3.2 million panels on a single site radically reduced unit costs) and a 30-year power purchase agreement (PPA) with the state-owned company EWEC, which turned the project into an asset with predictable cash flow.
Financing Model. Construction costing $871 million was carried out using a limited-recourse financing model — lending secured by the project’s future revenues, without recourse to the sponsors’ assets. Debt syndication (eight leading banks, from Japan’s MUFG to France’s BNP Paribas) distributed risks among international capital. The 75/25 debt-to-equity ratio allowed shareholders to maximize return on equity.
Refinancing Through Green Bonds. In 2022, the project operator made a strategic move — issuing green bonds worth $700.8 million. This yielded concrete results: reduced debt service costs by transitioning from bank loans to fixed-rate bonds at 3.625%; extended maturity to 2049, perfectly aligned with the plant’s operational cycle; access to ESG capital (environmental, social, and governance criteria), enabling the attraction of “cheap” money from institutional investors mandated to invest in green assets.
Economic Conclusion. Noor Abu Dhabi proved that renewable energy in the desert is not a subsidized toy but a highly efficient business case. Thanks to robotic dry panel cleaning, which saves millions of liters of water and reduces labor costs, combined with sophisticated debt management, the plant generates stable profits while simultaneously replacing expensive natural gas consumption in the UAE domestic market.
Geopolitical Dimension: Solar hubs can be built in countries that are today epicenters of conflict (Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen), creating an economic alternative to war. When local populations gain employment and stable energy supply, terrorist recruitment bases begin to empty.
An Unexpected Ally: The ongoing blockade of the Strait of Hormuz makes energy security a priority for countries that import energy by sea. Australia, a major LNG exporter, itself feels the pressure due to its dependence on Middle Eastern routes; it could become a key investor in solar hubs, diversifying its own energy balance and creating new markets for its technologies.
3.3. What Contracts the Military-Industrial Complex Gains (Summary)
Both projects create an order portfolio capable of keeping defense industry capacities busy for decades. In each case, it involves using the same engineering competencies — precision, reliability, autonomy, resilience to extreme conditions — but for creation rather than destruction.
- Fire control systems, radar — maritime traffic management, AIS buoys; monitoring of solar fields.
- Tank and armored vehicle engines — quarry equipment, bulldozers, excavators for dredging and construction.
- Shipbuilding — barges, tugboats, dredgers, floating wind platforms.
- Communications and encryption systems — digital logistics platforms, critical infrastructure protection.
- Space technologies — satellite monitoring of waterways, solar fields, dredging control.
- Metal structure manufacturing — bridges, locks, quay walls, solar panel frames, power line supports.
- Autonomous power systems — energy supply for remote desert facilities, backup systems.
The investment volume for full-scale implementation of just one of these projects is estimated at tens of billions of euros. Together, they create a market comparable to annual global military expenditures (over $2 trillion), but directed toward creation rather than destruction.
3.4. Risks and Mitigation Strategies
No large-scale infrastructure project is without obstacles. But these risks are not fatal if anticipated.
Risk 1. Security (Black Sea, border regions) For the Black Sea–Danube Corridor, key problems are residual mines, attack threats, and lack of insurance. Solutions: a permanent EU naval mission along the lines of ASPIDES, government-backed war risk insurance for the construction period, phased expansion of safe routes. For desert solar hubs, the main danger is local instability. Solutions: locating plants in relatively stable enclaves (e.g., the coast of Oman, Morocco, western regions of Iraq), engaging international security structures, integrating projects into UN recovery programs.
Risk 2. Political Pressure (Turkey, internal EU competition) The Montreux Convention gives Turkey leverage over Black Sea shipping. Solutions: developing direct Danube routes that minimize Bosphorus transit; for solar hubs, focusing on Mediterranean ports not dependent on the straits. Within the EU, resistance may come from competing ports (Rotterdam, Hamburg) and traditional energy sectors. Solutions: bring these players in as project shareholders; include projects in the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) and Green Deal mechanisms, creating mandatory quotas for conversion technology use.
Risk 3. Infrastructure Bottlenecks The Iron Gates on the Danube, differing rail gauges, customs queues. Solutions: variable gauge systems (already operating at Poland–Lithuania and Spain–France borders), 24-hour navigation with a single dispatch center, joint training and technology transfer programs from the ports of Antwerp, Rotterdam, and German logistics centers.
Risk 4. Financing Where to get tens of billions? Solutions: blended finance — EU grants + European Investment Bank loans + private investment. For solar hubs, engaging sovereign wealth funds from Gulf countries and, as noted above, Australia, which is interested in diversifying its energy supply.
None of these risks is fatal, but ignoring them means building castles in the air.
4. Economic Targeting: Why This Is More Profitable Than War
Actors without will respond to profit. So the key question is: how can peaceful construction be made more profitable than war?
The answer lies in three factors:
Scale. Annual global military expenditures exceed $2 trillion. Even 1–2% of this amount represents tens of billions of euros capable of changing the system’s logic. Directing such funds into infrastructure projects creates demand that will interest even the largest players.
Long-termism. Military contracts are often short-term, dependent on political circumstances. Infrastructure projects are designed for 20–30 years — the predictability that the defense business lacks.
Time Horizon. The first major contracts could be signed within 12–18 months of a political decision — enough time to launch dredging, order quarry equipment, and begin solar field construction. For actors without will, this means a quick return on investment without long waiting periods.
Multiplier Effect. Every euro invested in logistics and renewable energy creates jobs, taxes, and regional development. A military euro spent on a shell disappears in an explosion. The difference in the multiplier is orders of magnitude — tens of times.
In addition, there are indirect economic effects: lower insurance premiums for shipping, rising land values along the corridor, development of related industries (agro-processing, green energy, tourism). For solar hubs — energy independence for Europe and the Middle East, reduced migration pressure through job creation in regions that are currently sources of instability.
For European states, this is also a matter of strategic autonomy. Today, 30% of uranium for EU nuclear power plants passes through Russia. The Black Sea–Danube Corridor allows Kazakhstan’s uranium to be obtained without Kremlin intermediation. Solar hubs will reduce dependence on gas and oil imports.
Instead of a Conclusion: From Diagnosis to Architecture
This text is not about everything being hopeless. It is about the fact that a way out exists.
Actors without will are not monsters. They are functions. Changing a function does not require moral awakening. It requires changing conditions: new contracts, new infrastructure, a new architecture of interests.
The Black Sea–Danube Corridor and solar hubs in deserts are only two examples among many possible. But they demonstrate a principle: when peaceful construction becomes more profitable than war, even the most powerful actors without will begin to change their behavior. They do not care whether they produce tanks or bulldozers, missiles or solar panels. What matters is what brings more money and stability.
War lasts as long as there are those willing to serve it. It ends when serving it becomes economically pointless.
This text is not a full stop. It is an invitation to those who hold the levers to move from words to contracts.
This text is part of the series “Geopolitics of the Unconscious”. Previous texts: “Silence”, “Form” ,”The Narcissism of Minor Differences”, “The Trianglе”
Translation performed with the assistance of AI.
Leave a Reply