The Conventional Arms Control System Through the Prism of Global Conflict Risk

Background. The relevance of the study is determined by the growing level of global geopolitical risk, rising military expenditure, increasing international arms transfers, intensifying technological competition, and the expanding use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the military domain. The purpose of the article is to develop and substantiate a model of conventional arms control that goes beyond quantitative restrictions on weapons and incorporates geopolitical risk, international cooperation, defence innovation, transformations in the nature of armed conflict, digitalization, and accountability for the use of AI. Methods. The study is based on a systemic, risk-oriented, and interdisciplinary approach. The empirical component draws on SIPRI data on military expenditure and arms transfers, contemporary indices of geopolitical risk and geopolitical alignment, documents governing international arms control regimes, as well as statistical and comparative analysis. The study also employs content analysis and systematization of academic sources, conceptual modelling to develop the authors’ model of global conflict risk and the conventional arms control system, and a risk-oriented typology of responsibility depending on the level of AI autonomy. Results. The study identifies a close interdependence between growing geopolitical risk, increasing demand for weapons, the expansion of defence-industrial cooperation, technological innovation, and transformations in the nature of armed conflict. According to SIPRI data, international transfers of major arms increased by 9.2% in 2021–2025 compared with 2016–2020, while European arms imports increased by 210%. Based on the synthesis of empirical evidence and theoretical approaches, the authors propose a model in which conventional arms control evolves from predominantly permit-based regulation towards continuous, risk-informed governance. The findings demonstrate the need to incorporate digital technologies and AI, data traceability, meaningful human control, and clearly defined responsibility into contemporary arms control mechanisms. Conclusions. The study proposes an authors’ model of global conflict risk and conventional arms control that integrates the relationships among geopolitical threats, demand for weapons, transformations in military technologies, changes in the nature of armed conflict, and the development of regulatory mechanisms. The contemporary conventional arms control system should therefore be understood not merely as a mechanism for restricting arms transfers, but as an adaptive governance framework for managing defence development under conditions of geopolitical and technological uncertainty. Its effectiveness should simultaneously ensure defence capability, traceability of arms transfers, risk assessment, technological reliability, meaningful human control over AI-enabled systems, and clearly assigned responsibility. For Ukraine, such an approach provides a conceptual basis for combining the rapid development of defence innovations with the requirements of international law, export control, and national security.