The costs and benefits of war.

There have been 148 wars in the world since the end of World War II, according to military analyst Ruth Sivard. If a war is defined as a conflict killing 1,000 people or more, there were 34 wars in the world in 1993, and about the same number last year--a large number of them going on simultaneously. It is generally known that the costs of even small wars can be staggering, often leaving the participating nations ravaged--though typically enriching certain industries and small factions, and providing geopolitical or financial benefits to outside parties willing to provide arms, training, or aid.

Yet, while most military antagonists may be astute appraisers of the costs of weapons, vehicles, and other military line items, few have any idea of the overall costs of wars--as though wars were not matters over which participants have any choice, and must be fought regardless of cost.

Now, a report just released in the United Kingdom provides what is believed to be the first comprehensive assessment of the costs and benefits of war. The results make it clear that there are indeed choices--and that alternative courses may sometimes achieve desired outcomes at far less cost or with far greater benefit.

The True Costs of Conflict, published by the London-based organization Saferworld in collaboration with six international organizations, offers assessments of seven major conflicts: East Timor (1975--), Ex-Yugoslavia (1989--), Iraq (1990--), Kashmir (1989--), Mozambique (1980-1992), and Sudan (1983--). The seven were chosen to represent the different kinds of conflict that commonly occur, from wars between nations to guerilla campaigns.

The case study of East Timor, for example, tracks the costs both to East Timor, which was invaded by Indonesia in 1975, and to the invading country. Some of the costs arc computed in social terms--more than one-third of the entire Timorese population killed, infant mortality elevated to the highest rate in the world, 400 schools destroyed, and nearly all the teachers executed.

The costs have also been quantified economically. After the invasion, agricultural output fell by almost 70 percent in just three years. Private investment disappeared, and since the invasion "there has not been a single U.S. dollar of foreign investment in East Timor."

For Indonesia, direct expenditures are estimated to have reached $1 million to $3 million per day over the past 20 years. In addition, since the early 1980s, Indonesia has spent hundreds of millions on "social development," emphasizing "Indonisation" of the Timorese--yet this effort has failed abjectly. These are heavy costs for a country with one of the lowest per capita incomes in the world, but much of the expense was born by the United States--which has strategic military and oil interests in the region.

The benefits to Indonesia included the apparent obliteration of Communism on its islands, enrichment of the country's ruling elite through the rise of military monopolies, and strengthened control of major sea routes between the Indian and Pacific Oceans, which "guaranteed it favorable relations with the United States, since continued good relations between the [United States] and Indonesia were seen as essential to the American South East Asia strategy." Yet, despite the investment of billions of dollars, the report notes that "little concrete benefit has accrued to Indonesia as a whole." Meanwhile, the annexed population remains impoverished and alienated.

Similarly, for each of the other conflicts studied, the report suggests that the benefits expected from investments in war may be more heavily offset by costs than has been widely believed.