According to the 2007 yearbook of the SIPRI - Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the world military expenditure in 2006 (around 1.204 billion in current US$) grew by 3,5% with respect to 2005. From 1997 and 2006 the rise has been an impressive 37%. It highlights that:The continued surge in China’s military spending—which reached an estimated $49.5 billion (in 2005 dollars)—saw it overtake Japan ($43.7 billion) to become the biggest military spender in Asia and the fourth biggest in the world in 2006. India was the third biggest spender in Asia, with $23.9 billion (in 2005 dollars). The USA spent $528.7 billion and Russia an estimated $34.7 billion (in 2005 dollars) on their military sectors in 2006.Given that USA, Russia and the European Union are the main suppliers, international trade of weapons has also increased. Almost 50% more if we compare the data from 2006 and 2002.
Contrary to what my fellow friend Marc Bou said in a post published in his blog, I do not believe in the idea that the increase in military expenditure is associated to a more peaceful world. It is true that international army forces are increasingly being used to secure fragile states in their way towards peace, it is true that armies are becoming crucial players in countries affected by natural disasters... but the important lack of transparency as well as the lack of regulation in this industry (including its trade) makes me feel really suspicious about this thesis.
It is also true that, as the SIPRI says, most forms of armed political violence appear to be either declining or stabilising, but random violence in the form of terrorism around the world seems to be increasing. More regulation and intelligence, and not more weapons, seems to be the key to fight these new forms of violence.
But above all these reasons, investing just a part of this 1.204 billion US$ in health and education would provide better returns in terms of stability and peace! I'm pretty sure about that!
No comments:
Post a Comment