Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

World Military Spending

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • World Military Spending

    http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spending
    An interesting read. The author has analytically compared the military spendings of various nations, however, what he has left out is the rational for each country to arm itself.

    Another interesting part is, his remarks on the reasons for reduction in spendings by most of the US allies. He asserts that the spendings dwindled down JUST because they saw the military threat diminishing after the Soviet collapse. My take on this is, it is both ways. The threat getting diminished is just fine, but one also has to take a note of the fact that NATO was/is still hanging around and with the US spending some 40% of the total global military spendings and its commitment towards the alliance and thereof towards the security of those countries, they found it appropriate to scale down their own military spendings while the US kept increasing it steadily.

    The question now is, where should the US go from here? Keep spending and increasing the expenses, while the allies steadily keep scaling down so as to maintain its lead, or scale down and let other contending nations catch up?
    Or encourage/pressurize its allies to beef up their own spendings, so that the US tax payers can have some respite while maintaining the military edge?
    sigpicAnd on the sixth day, God created the Field Artillery...

  • #2
    Originally posted by Deltacamelately View Post

    The question now is, where should the US go from here? Keep spending and increasing the expenses, while the allies steadily keep scaling down so as to maintain its lead, or scale down and let other contending nations catch up?
    Or encourage/pressurize its allies to beef up their own spendings, so that the US tax payers can have some respite while maintaining the military edge?
    Australias threats are realistically analised roughly twice a decade in the form of a white paper. The capabilities of the most relevant whitepaper (2000) are yet to be realised, they are in procurement phase & or construction.

    Arguably despite unit parity downsize the forces are far more capable, and far more deployable than during the the cold war. We won't be beefing up defence spending anytime soon - we have problems manning the Navy as is let alone expenditure with major fighter buys, LHD' Buys, Arty Buys, C-17 Buys, Air Refueling Buys, AEWC Buys, NH 90 Buys, AWD Buys... It's all happening - and all has to be paid for.

    At present the importance is on getting our restructuring right. I suppose for European nations not faced with a Soviet threat, defining their own military structure is somewhat difficult in Defining Purpose.

    For instance, we have several small nations North and NE of us that have small governments, that are prone to turmoil. Nations that would help out (Malaysia / Singapore) have limits in their own expenditure and their own priorities. New Zealand is very force specific. The French aren't really that interested. Basically as the 'large modern democratic country' of the regeon in first world conditions, despite our limited resources (manpower/expenditure) this forces us (or rather some people would like to think so) to aspire to a well rounded capability that places preecedence on force delivery. We only realised this in the late 90's... with East Timor.

    What do you do if your Germany? Huge economy, no overseas territories - liklihood of war with immediate neighbors is close to nil... Getting an offensive posture is politically sensitive....

    The U.S sees it's strategic / economic interests in a completely different light and has a completely different mentality when it comes to defence expenditure...

    IMO of course
    Last edited by Chunder; 14 Nov 09,, 17:10. Reason: grammar
    Ego Numquam

    Comment


    • #3
      1/3 of US military spending is payroll/benefits.
      "So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3

      Comment


      • #4
        what would happen if the economic situation for the US worsens? what would be the likely impact on US defence spending? will the US be able to maintain force levels in asia esp around japan-korea-taiwan and in indian ocean?
        As chinese naval build up continues in this situation, would this not result in other asian nations ramping up defence expenditure to counter this?
        what about australian naval plans in this situation - i understand a recent white paper was criticised in china as well as in certain quarters in australia for siting a chinese threat . as of now, australian naval forces concentrate on indonesia - malaysia - pacific islands. what happens when chinese capabilities increase to a point where, along with a shrinking US presence, the seas begin to be dominated by PLAN? or is that a very far fetched scenario?
        Obama's statement in Japan as well as the idea of 'strategic reassurance' ( reassuring China that is ) doesnt seem to be very reassuring for others.

        Comment

        Working...
        X