GLOBAL MILITARY SPENDING: Trends & Catalysts

 

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), has published data on global military spending for the year 2023. The Gist of it is as follows.

 

Total global military expenditure reached $2443 billion in 2023, an increase of 6.8 per cent in real terms from 2022. This is the steepest increase since 2009.

 

The top three largest spenders in 2023 are the United States, China and Russia. Particularly large increases were recorded in Europe, Asia, Oceania and the Middle East.

 

Four catalysts that encouraged military spending are:-

    • Russia’s war against Ukraine (supported by the USA, Europe and NATO).
    • China’s military rise and belligerent attitude.
    • Israel’s war against HAMAS and Iran.
    • Organised crimes.

 

Russia Ukraine War

 

Russia. Russia’s military spending increased by 24 per cent to an estimated $109 billion in 2023, marking a 57 per cent rise since 2014. In 2023 Russia’s military spending made up 16 per cent of total government spending and its military burden (military spending as a share of gross domestic product, GDP) was 5.9 per cent.

 

Ukraine. Ukraine was the eighth largest spender in 2023, after a spending surge of 51 per cent to reach $64.8 billion. This gave Ukraine a military burden of 37 per cent, representing 58 per cent of total government spending. Ukraine’s military spending in 2023 was 59 per cent of that of Russia’s. However, Ukraine received at least $35 billion in military aid during the year, including $25.4 billion from the USA. Combined, this aid and Ukraine’s military spending were equivalent to about 91 per cent of Russian spending.

 

USA & NATO. The USA remains NATO’s major spender but European members increased their share In 2023 the 31 NATO members accounted for $1341 billion, equal to 55 per cent of the world’s military expenditure. In 2023 most European NATO members increased their military expenditure. Their combined share of the NATO total was 28 per cent, the highest in a decade. Military spending by the USA rose by 2.3 per cent to reach $916 billion in 2023, representing 68 per cent of total NATO military spending.

 

China’s Rise & Belligerent Attitude

 

China. China, the world’s second-largest military spender, allocated an estimated $296 billion to the military in 2023, an increase of 6.0 per cent from 2022. This was the 29th consecutive year-on-year rise in China’s military expenditure. China accounted for half of total military spending across the Asia and Oceania region.

 

Japan & Taiwan. Japan allocated $50.2 billion to its military in 2023, which was 11 per cent more than in 2022. Taiwan’s military expenditure also grew by 11 per cent in 2023, reaching $16.6 billion.

 

India. India was the fourth largest military spender globally in 2023. At $83.6 billion, its military expenditure was 4.2 per cent higher than in 2022.

 

Israel & Hamas / Iran War

 

Middle East. Estimated military expenditure in the Middle East increased by 9.0 per cent to $200 billion in 2023. This was the highest annual growth rate in the region seen in the past decade.

 

Israel. Israel’s military spending—the second largest in the region after Saudi Arabia—grew by 24 per cent to reach $27.5 billion in 2023.

 

Iran. Iran was the fourth largest military spender in the Middle East in 2023 with $10.3 billion. According to available data, the share of military spending allocated to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps grew from 27 per cent to 37 per cent between 2019 and 2023.

 

Organised Crime

 

Central America and the Caribbean. Military spending in Central America and the Caribbean in 2023 was 54 per cent higher than in 2014. Escalating crime levels have led to the increased use of military forces against criminal gangs in several countries in the sub-region.

 

Dominican Republic.  Military spending by the Dominican Republic rose by 14 per cent in 2023 in response to worsening gang violence in neighbouring Haiti. The Dominican Republic’s military spending has risen steeply since 2021 when the assassination of Haitian President Jovenel Moïse threw Haiti into crisis.

 

Mexico. In Mexico, military expenditure reached $11.8 billion in 2023, a 55 per cent increase from 2014 (but a 1.5 per cent decrease from 2022). Allocations to the Guardia Nacional (National Guard)—a militarised force used to curb criminal activity—rose from 0.7 per cent of Mexico’s total military expenditure in 2019, when the force was created, to 11 per cent in 2023.

 

The largest percentage increase in military spending by any country in 2023 was seen in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (+105 per cent), where there has been protracted conflict between the government and non-state armed groups. South Sudan recorded the second largest percentage increase (+78 per cent) amid internal violence and spillover from the Sudanese civil war.

 

Comments

 

The unprecedented rise in military spending is attributed to the global deterioration in peace and security.

 

Russia’s increase in military spending is the cost associated with the digestion of Crimea in 2014 and Ukrainian regions now.

 

Ukraian’s spending (a high amount of 58% of total govt spending) is difficult to sustain without foreign aid. Further, it will need money for the reconstruction of the country.

 

Two years of war in Ukraine has fundamentally changed the security outlook in European NATO states. The change in threat perception is reflected in growing shares of their GDP being directed towards military spending.

 

China is directing much of its growing military budget to boost the combat readiness of the People’s Liberation Army. This has prompted the governments of Japan, Taiwan and others to significantly build up their military capabilities. China’s growing military power is driving up the expenditure of its neighbours and threatened states.

 

War and tensions in the Middle East have fuelled the biggest spending increase of the past decade. The spending has increased mainly driven by Israel’s large-scale offensive in Gaza in response to the attack on southern Israel by Hamas in October 2023.

 

In recent years, diplomatic relations between Israel and several Arab countries have been warming up. The outbreak of a major war in Gaza has created fears of a region-wide conflict.

 

Military action against organised crime to suppress gang violence has been a growing trend. It also pushes up spending, as the governments are unable to address the problem using conventional means.

 

 

Bottom Line

Ultimately the common man suffers the ills of war.

Moreover, this money could be used constructively for development and improvement of quality of life.

 

Points to Ponder

The defence industry is the ultimate gainer.

Are they encouraging the unrest?

 

Suggestions and value additions are most welcome

 

618
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register here:-

Subscribe

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from sources deemed reliable and accurate. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for purposes of wider dissemination.

AIRCRAFT DRIFT

 

All pictures : courtesy Internet

 

Aircraft drift is the unintentional sideways movement of an aircraft from its intended path, caused by factors like crosswinds, wind shear, or pilot error. Several factors can contribute to aircraft drift from the runway during takeoff or landing.

 

 

Crosswinds. Strong crosswinds can push the aircraft off course, especially during landing when the aircraft is near the ground.

 

 

Wind Shear. Sudden changes in wind speed and direction, known as wind shear, can cause the aircraft to drift unexpectedly.

 

 

Pilot Error. Incorrect control inputs or misjudgment of the aircraft’s position relative to the runway can lead to drift.

 

 

Runway Conditions. Wet or contaminated runways can reduce traction, affecting the aircraft’s ability to maintain the desired track.

 

 

Aircraft Performance. Mechanical issues or aircraft performance limitations, such as engine power or control surfaces, can contribute to drift.

 

 

Weight and Balance. Improper distribution of weight or balance within the aircraft can affect its stability and handling characteristics.

 

 

Environmental Factors. Visibility issues, such as fog or glare, can make it challenging for pilots to maintain alignment with the runway.

 

 

Air Traffic Control Instructions. Miscommunication or misunderstanding of instructions from air traffic control can result in deviations from the intended flight path. 

 

Addressing these factors requires a combination of pilot skill, aircraft performance capabilities, proper maintenance, and adherence to safety protocols and procedures.

 

Coming Up:- A detailed article on the subject.

 

Suggestions and value additions are most welcome

 

618
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

 

For regular updates, please register here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

Pictures: Courtesy Internet.

 

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from sources deemed reliable and accurate. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for purposes of wider dissemination.

 

Airpower Theorists

 

 

Giulio Doheut. Giulio Doheut was born into a military family in Italy in 1869. He served as a professional artillery officer and was never trained as a pilot but he was an innovator and had the quality of stirring things up. He was appointed commander of Italy’s first aviation battalion before World War I. During the War, his indiscreet criticism of his military and civilian superiors resulted in him being court-martialled and imprisoned for one year. However, the war (Battle of Caporetto) demonstrated that he was correct and was later exonerated. Soon after the war, Douhet was given a place of honour, but he left the service and passed his remaining years writing and speaking about airpower. He brought forth his Command of the Air in 1921 as an official publication. Douhet died in 1930.

 

Core Ideas and Beliefs. Douhet argued that an early air attack on the enemy’s vital centres could win a humane victory, while surface forces could contain the enemy. In his opinion, the air attacks would hasten the termination of war and the overall death and destruction would be lesser. Douhet assumed that all wars will be total wars, civilian morale is unstable, airpower is inherently offensive, the bomber will always get through, and the hegemony of the defensive form of ground warfare is permanent.

 

 

Hugh Trenchard. Hugh Trenchard, a British theorist was born in 1873. He learned to fly in 1913 and fought much of World War I as head of the Royal Flying Corps in France.  Initially, he was opposed to the idea of the creation of an independent air force and strategic bombing. On his return to the United Kingdom in 1918, he was appointed chief of the air staff of the Royal Air Force (RAF). He remained in his post through the first decade of the RAF’s existence and was beleaguered by both the army and navy because they were generally determined to undo the creation of the RAF. He soon became an advocate of strategic bombing and colonial control through the use of airpower. He lived on for a long time after retiring in 1929 and died in 1956.

 

Core Ideas and Beliefs. Trenchard’s core idea was that victory could be achieved by bombing enemy vital centres and thus breaking his will. He was a little vague on what those centres were, but he seemed to suggest that civilian morale could be undermined by attacking vital industrial and communications targets. He also believed that the RAF could do more to maintain order in colonial areas much more cheaply than the other services. He assumed that the offensive is the stronger form of air war, air superiority is a prerequisite for all other military operations, civilian morale is fragile (the moral effect of bombing is much more devastating than the physical effect), the bomber will always get through and it does not need escort, and the air war aspects like night navigation, target acquisition, and bombing accuracy are manageable problems.

 

 

William Mitchell. William Mitchell was born in France in 1879 and spent the first three years there.  He came from a wealthy and prominent Wisconsin family (His father, was a US senator of the Democratic Party).   He attended a private school and was enrolled in the ancestor unit of George Washington University for three years, but did not graduate. He left school when the Spanish-American War broke out. He remained in the Signal Corps, serving in Cuba, Philippines and Alaska. Mitchell was appointed to the General Staff at a young age, while still a captain, and was the only Signal Corps officer so assigned. Mitchell occasionally wrote on aviation subjects but displayed no particular interest in flying then. He completed his flight training near Norfolk in 1916, just before the United States entered World War I. He commanded combat aviation at the front and returned home after the war to become assistant chief of the Air Service.  Mitchell wrote several books, some of which were published before he resigned. He deliberately provoked a court-martial in 1925, was convicted of insubordination, and left the Army early in 1926.  He lived on his farm in Virginia for the rest of his life and died in February 1936.

 

Core Ideas and Beliefs. William Mitchell propagated that Airpower, organised into a separate, equal (to Army and Navy), and autonomous air force under a unified Department of Defence, could serve as the most effective and economical means of defending the homeland. Even for fighting an overseas enemy, airpower could be used to decisively attack the enemy’s vital centres without first defeating his armies and navies. Mitchell assumed that future wars would be total, airpower is inherently offensive and its use is revolutionary, civilian morale is fragile command of the air is a prime requirement, the bomber will always get through, and airmen alone can understand the proper employment of airpower.

 

 

John Warden. John Warden was born in Texas in 1943. He earned a master’s degree in political science from Texas Tech University was appointed to the Air Force Academy from Pennsylvania and graduated in the class of 1965. He conducted a combat tour in OV-10s with the First Air Cavalry Division in Vietnam, and a tour in F-4Ds. While at the National War College, Warden wrote a thesis on air operations planning at the theatre level of war. After that, he was assigned as F-15 wing commander at Bitburg, Germany. He remained in that grade when he returned to the Pentagon to head CHECKMATE, an office serving under the Air Force deputy chief of staff for plans and operations and concerned with long-range planning. Warden was serving in that capacity at the onset of the Gulf War. After the Gulf War, Colonel Warden was transferred to Maxwell Air Force Base, where he became commandant of the Air Command and Staff College (ACSC). He stirred up that institution greatly, reorienting its study to focus on the operational strategy level of war and air planning at that level. Warden retired from the USAF in 1995. Warden wrote the book “The Air Campaign: Planning for Combat”, which focused on a European war. He seemed to be much more concerned with airpower than with flying aeroplanes.

 

Core Ideas and Beliefs. The core ideas of John Warden are that the art of air campaign planning is vital and that once air superiority is assured, airpower can be used either in support of the other arms, or can be supported by the other arms, and sometimes can function independently to achieve decisive effects. The technology also has made parallel attack (as opposed to sequential ones) more possible than ever, and that is highly desirable. The centers of gravity vary from case to case. They may be arranged in five rings. At the center are leadership targets, then means of production, infrastructure, population, and fielded forces in the outer perimeter. Almost all states and other political entities have the five rings, and they always appear with leadership at the center. In general, it is preferable to attack the rings from the center, then move outwards.

 

Coming up:- Detailed article on relevance of their theories today.

 

Suggestions and value additions are most welcome

 

618
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

 

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from sources deemed reliable and accurate. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for purposes of wider dissemination.