The Rearmarment of Imperialism

The statistical series of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, updated from year to year, reports on the military spending of over 100 states in the world since 1988. Military spending is calculated in three ways: in the current currency of each state, in dollars and finally as a percentage of the gross domestic product. The analysis of the evolution of military spending in the long run, the comparison of the expenditure of individual countries among themselves and with regard to GDP, allows us to draw a fairly realistic picture of the evolution of the balance of power in the world among the various imperialist groups.

Another series refers to the values of the sales and purchases of weapons systems by the various countries, expressed in constant 2016 US dollars, and it is also possible to trace a generic type of arms exchanged (airplanes, ships, armored vehicles), missiles, etc.).

Military spending from 1988 to 2017 showed a small dip in 2013 followed by constant increases, despite the economic crisis having generally reduced financial expenditures by countries.

The prolongation of the crisis in fact leads to an increase in conflict between the major imperialist states whose relations tend to become more and more tense, upsetting the balances established at the end of the Second World War and then painfully re-established after the fall of the USSR/Russian Empire.

The United States is the militarily the strongest imperialist state, the real police force of the world, but its economic power shows signs of slowing down in the face of competitors like China and Germany. The difficulties of the US economy became evident when the new administration started a trade war by introducing tariffs on many products considered strategic for that country.But the fact that the United States produces at higher prices than its competitors, imports more than it exports, and lives above its means by increasing its external debt, demonstrates its economic and financial weaknesses. At the same time, the fact is that only through the US’ military and diplomatic power can it still impose the dollar as a world currency. The tariff war is only beginning but has already caused strong concerns in Europe and China.

The Chinese government has undertaken a decisive policy of rearmament with the aim of enabling the armed forces of that state to counteract the excessive power of the United States and its allies in the Pacific. Beijing’s efforts are attested not only by a growing military spending that has gone from $108 billion in 2008 to $228b in 2017 (an expenditure which is 13.4% of total world spending) but also by great technological advances, especially in regards to aviation and the navy. The new Chinese policy aimed at extending control over the South China Sea and protecting its trade routes that connect the country to the Indian Ocean and the Mediterranean obviously is troubling to other regional economies such as Japan, South Korea and even India.

The eastern border of Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea to Russia, the endless war in the Middle East with its extension to Yemen, the clash in the South China Sea for the control of a series of strategic islets and related sea areas, growing contrasts in various parts of Africa for access to areas of production of strategic raw materials, are only the greatest conflicts. Among the smaller states tensions are also rising, for example, between the Baltic States and Russia and between Turkey and Greece for control of the Aegean Sea and its oil resources.

To dominate the framework of arms expenditure are a “handful of countries”, as Lenin wrote. In fact, the fifteen states that spend the most, account for to 80% of the total world spending and the first two of these, the United States and China, alone make up 48.6%! It is this small group of states that therefore holds the military force sufficient not only to defend their economic, political and diplomatic interests, but to also impose them on the militarily and economically weaker states.

But it is also these states, with some exceptions, that produce the major weapon systems for their own armies and also for others. This is a world trade sector that has been growing strongly since 2002 and has not suffered the repercussions of the economic crisis.

Below is a brief account of the military spending of the top ten states in the world that are the most heavily armed.

The United States remains the biggest imperialist power in the world, but to maintain its military apparatus, with dozens of bases scattered around the world and 7 naval fleets in action, has a huge cost. In 2010 that cost increased by 4.7%, one of the largest increases in the world. But those spending increases declined to only 3.1% in 2017. At its greatest, in 2010, the US spending was $768 billion, or 45.6% of world’s spending. In 2017 it fell to $597 billion or 35.2%. According to Sipri, however, “US military spending is expected to increase significantly in 2018 to support the increase in military personnel and the modernization of classic and nuclear weapons”.

In the United States, armament production is still a big economic affair since 34% of world exports are purchased. They have increased by 25% between the five years 2008-2012 and 2013-2017. In 2017 arms sales were $12.4 billion, with sales directed towards dozens of countries. Among the largest, two of the “hottest” regions of the globe: the Middle East; Saudi Arabia ($3,425 million), Iraq ($506), Israel ($515), the UAE ($499), Qatar ($496); and East Asia, Australia ($1,172), Japan ($479), South Korea ($456), Taiwan ($493).

China is seen by the United States as one of the “revisionist” powers and is seen, together with Russia, as its main global opponent in the medium to long term. China continues a policy of strengthening and modernizing its armed forces, especially the air force and navy. The policy is needed in order to break China’s encirclement by the United States and its allies in the Pacific Ocean. In 2008 China’s military spending accounted for 7% of world spending; last year it grew to 13.4%. Its military spending, which went from 108 billion to 228 billion dollars during the same period, represents only 1.9% of its GDP. On the other hand, the draft budget for Beijing for 2018 still provides an increase in military spending of 8.1% compared to 2017.

Beijing is trying to become increasingly autonomous in its weapons systems. Its expenditures show a steady decline in imports, which fell by 19% between the five years 2008-12 and 2013-17. However, it remains in fifth place among importers of armaments while it also is also increasing its share of exports, especially to Pakistan ($514 million), Bangladesh ($204), Thailand ($129) and Myanmar ($70) as well as to many African countries.

Saudi Arabia has the third largest military budget in the world and is the second largest importer of weapons, immediately behind India. Its military spending suffered a sharp reduction in 2016, falling from $90 to $64 billion. But in 2017 it has risen to about $70B. Riyadh allocates about 10% of GDP to its military budget. It has been openly involved, for years now, in the war in Yemen and indirectly in the war in Syria by supplying weapons and equipment to various Islamist groups. It is currently in a joint de-facto anti-Iranian alliance with Israel and the United States.

India also participates actively in the race for rearmament. It has the fourth largest military budget in the world, going from $41 billion in expenditures in 2008 to $60B in 2017 which amounts from 2.6% to 3.5% of world spending. 2.5% of its GDP is allocated to the military budget. India is the largest importer of weapons systems in the world, spending 12% of global arms expenditure.

In the five year period 2013-17, the greatest arms supplier to India, with 62% of the total, was Russia. The United States has increased its exports to the country more than five times in the last few years. India’s accession to the anti-Chinese QUAD Pact, together with the United States, Japan and Australia, is likely to continue to shift the balance to the United States, which has simultaneously reduced its arms exports to Pakistan by 76% between the five-year period 2008-12 and that of 2013-17.

France is one of the largest military spenders, surpassing even Russia in the decade 2008-17, with $56 billion spent in 2017. Its share of world spending decreased from 3.5 in 2008 to 3.3 in 2017. As an exporter, France occupies the third place, immediately after USA and Russia, with 7% in 2017 of the world total. There is considerable French interventionism in international crises. Like the US, France exports a little all over the world, but among its best customers are Egypt, where it has exported $1.676 billion in the last two years, India ($446m), China ($255m), Singapore ($213m) and Indonesia ($160m).

Russia is seen as the main enemy of the USA, at least in the short term. While it can pose an immediate danger with its policy towards Ukraine, Georgia and other former parts of the Russian empire, it does not have the economic structure to rise to the rank of global power. This despite its territorial extension and the recent restructuring and modernization of the military apparatus. Russia’s military spending in the last ten years is sixth largest. In 2016, Russia’s military spending reached its greatest amount, $69 billion, but last year it fell by about 20% compared to the previous year, falling from a good 5.5% of GDP to 4.3%.

Its exports are directed only to some countries traditionally linked to the former Soviet Union: in the last two years it has exported to India ($4.075b), Algeria ($2.348b), China ($1.499b), Egypt ($1.288b), Viet Nam ($1.167b).

Britain’s military spending is closely behind that of France and Russia. After reaching a maximum of €58 billion in 2009, it has continued to decline, reaching around $48 billion in the last few years. In the decade 2008-17 it amounts to 522 billion. Expenditure relative to GDP fell from 2.4% in 2009 to 1.8% in 2017. Its percentage of global spending also decreased from 3.7% in 2008 to 2.7% in 2017.

Great Britain also exports mainly to the states where it has a traditional influence: Saudi Arabia, ($1.279 billion in the last two years), Oman ($540m), India ($143m).

Japan, which is threatened by China’s new “revisionist” military strategy, has a policy of rearmament. Although it does not officially have an army but only a “Self-Defense Force”, it has the most powerful fleet in the Pacific, second only to that of the United States. Japan is in fact the eighth power in the world for military spending in the decade 2008-17. For years it has been around $46 billion a year, about 1% of GNP, and in 2017 it constituted 2.7% of world military spending. Recently, the Japanese government has removed the legislative impediments for arms exports abroad and it is expected that Japan will soon be able to also take a leading role as an exporter of weapons systems, given the high technological level of the weapons it produces.

Germany has always kept military spending relatively low at 1.3% of GDP. In 1992 it was $54 billion, second only to the USA and France. In 2013 it fell to $39 billion and then increased to $43, but still remains 1.2% of GDP. In the last two years it has mainly exported to South Korea ($777 million), Algeria ($613m), Italy ($560m), Qatar ($371m), Egypt ($340m), Greece ($275m), Indonesia ($168m), USA ($150m) and Saudi Arabia ($118m). Between 2010 and 2017 it equaled France with 5.8% of world exports, but in the last year, while France has grown to 7% Germany has fallen to 5.3%.

South Korea is certainly a country in the eye of a storm right now. Since the end of the Korean War the country has been “protected” by a strong contingent of US troops, about 35,000 men. Recently, a state-of-the-art anti-missile system, supplied by the US, the THAAD, was installed, with the motivation to protect the country from a missile attack by North Korea. But in fact, the THAAD system allows you to control the skies all the way to southern China. Beijing has repeatedly made its opposition know to THAAD’s deployment by openly threatening retaliation.

South Korea, which spent $17 billion in armaments in 1992, reached a total of $29b in 2008, or 1.9% of the world total, reaching tenth place. Its spending then grew steadily to reach $38 billion in 2017, accounting for 2.6% of national GDP and 2.2% of world spending.

In addition to all this, many European states are members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and have agreed to increase their military spending, arguing that Russia poses a growing threat. The total military expenditure of the 29 NATO members is $900 billion in 2017, or 52% of global spending.

Since the mid-eighties, the different states of Western Europe have steadily reduced their military effort halving their military expenditure as a proportion of GDP. For example, France dropped from 3.7% to 2.3%, Germany from 3.2% to 1.2%, Britain from 4.9% to 1.8%, to name just a few. But this is true for all countries in Western Europe. However, there is no doubt that the increase in geopolitical tensions and recent major maneuvers undertaken by Russia can only revive the arms race in Europe. Russian imperialism, which is in a weak position on the economic terrain, is accustomed to using military intimidation as a diplomatic means. In 2017, Russia made a real provocation by carrying out military maneuvers at the very frontiers of the Baltic States and Poland. In September of 2018 Russia organized maneuvers on a scale not seen since the cold war. Chinese troops participated in these military maneuvers. China wants to create a new silk road in order to flood Europe with its goods and later capital. Its participation in the Russian maneuvers shows that it could participate in a military invasion of Europe by land. For the moment it is only a question of pressure from Russia, which has taken the precaution of carrying out these maneuvers on the other side of the Urals and in the eastern part of Siberia. Russia also invited NATO representatives as observers. Nevertheless, these maneuvers are unprecedented in their scale – 300,000 soldiers, 36,000 military vehicles, 1,000 planes and 80 ships, etc. – they exceed the largest of USSR’s maneuvers held in 1981.