Det danske Fredsakademi
Kronologi over fredssagen og international politik 23. April
2012 / Time Line April 23, 2012
Version 3.0
22. April 2012, 24. April 2012
04/23/2012
The Shame of Nations: A New Record is Set for Spending on
War
By Lawrence S.
Wittner
On April 17, 2012, as millions of Americans were
filing their income tax returns, the highly-respected Stockholm
International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) released its latest study of world military spending.
In case Americans were wondering where most of their tax money --
and the tax money of other nations -- went in the previous year,
the answer from SIPRI was clear: to war and preparations for
war.
World military spending reached a record $1,738 billion in 2011 --
an increase of $138 billion over the previous year. The United
States accounted for 41 percent of that, or $711 billion.
Some news reports have emphasized that, from the standpoint of
reducing reliance on armed might, this actually represents
progress. After all, the increase in “real” global
military spending -- that is, expenditures after corrections for
inflation and exchange rates -- was only 0.3 percent. And this
contrasts with substantially larger increases in the preceding
thirteen years.
But why are military expenditures continuing to increase -- indeed,
why aren’t they substantially decreasing -- given the
governmental austerity measures of recent years? Amid the economic
crisis that began in late 2008 (and which continues to the present
day), most governments have been cutting back their spending
dramatically on education, health care, housing, parks, and other
vital social services. However, there have not been corresponding
cuts in their military budgets.
Americans, particularly, might seek to understand why in this
context U.S. military spending has not been significantly
decreased, instead of being raised by $13 billion -- admittedly a
“real dollar” decrease of 1.2 percent, but hardly one
commensurate with Washington’s wholesale slashing of social
spending. Yes, military expenditures by China and Russia increased
in 2011. And in “real” terms, too. But, even so, their
military strength hardly rivals that of the United States. Indeed,
the United States spent about five times as much as China (the
world’s #2 military power) and ten times as much as Russia
(the world’s #3 military power) on its military forces during
2011. Furthermore, when U.S. allies like Britain, France, Germany,
and Japan are factored in, it is clear that the vast bulk of world
military expenditures are made by the United States and its
military allies.
This might account for the fact that the government of China, which
accounts for only 8.2 percent of world military spending, believes
that increasing its outlay on armaments is reasonable and
desirable. Apparently, officials of many nations share that
competitive feeling.
Unfortunately, the military rivalry among nations -- one that has
endured for centuries -- results in a great squandering of national
resources. Many nations, in fact, devote most of their available
income to funding their armed forces and their weaponry. In the
United States, an estimated 58 percent of the U.S.
government’s discretionary tax dollars go to war and
preparations for war. “Almost every country with a military
is on an insane path, spending more and more on missiles, aircraft,
and guns,” remarked John Feffer, co-director of Foreign
Policy in Focus. “These countries should be confronting the
real threats of climate change, hunger, disease, and oppression,
not wasting taxpayers’ money on their military.”
Of course, defenders of military expenditures reply that military
force actually protects people from war. But does it? If so, how
does one explain the fact that the major military powers of the
past century -- the United States, Russia, Britain, Germany,
France, Italy, Japan, and China -- have been almost constantly at
war during that time? What is the explanation for the fact that the
United States -- today’s military giant -- is currently
engaged in at least two wars (in Iraq and Afghanistan) and appears
to be on the verge of a third (with Iran)? Perhaps the maintenance
of a vast military machine does not prevent war but, instead,
encourages it.
In short, huge military establishments can be quite
counterproductive. Little wonder that they have been condemned
repeatedly by great religious and ethical leaders. Even many
government officials have decried war and preparations for war --
although usually by nations other than their own.
Thus, the release of the new study by SIPRI should not be a cause
for celebration. Rather, it provides an appropriate occasion to
contemplate the fact that, this past year, nations spent more money
on the military than at any time in human history. Although this
situation might still inspire joy in the hearts of government
officials, top military officers, and defense contractors, people
farther from the levers of military power might well conclude that
it’s a hell of a way to run a world.
Lawrence S. Wittner is professor of history emeritus at
SUNY/Albany. His latest book is "Working for Peace and Justice:
Memoirs of an Activist Intellectual” (University of Tennessee
Press).
04/23/2012
Top
Send
kommentar, email
eller søg i Fredsakademiet.dk
|