You are here: Home » Press » 2009 » Press release Annual Report 2008/2009
Print this page

The trend towards a build-up of conventional arms continues despite nuclear disarmament initiatives

May 14, 2009

In their 2008/2009 Annual Report, experts from BICC (Bonn International Center for Conversion) welcome the new disarmament initiatives in the nuclear field. Nevertheless, the peace researchers’ figures indicate that the trend towards a build-up of conventional arms remains unbroken. Germany’s defense budget and arms exports have also reached a new high. BICC experts describe the widening divide between military expenditure and spending on development cooperation as alarming.

In the words of Peter J. Croll, Director of BICC, “President Obama’s vision of a world without nuclear weapons points in the right direction. But the issue of the continuing rise in global military expenditure must also be put on the disarmament agenda.”

BICC’s Annual Report shows: The worldwide increase in military expenditure, which began in the mid-1990s, also continued in 2007, the latest year for which comprehensive data is available. Expenditure in 2007 amounted to a total of US $1,339 billion, which in real terms (i.e. adjusted for inflation) represents an increase of six percent compared with 2006 and 45 percent since 1998.

Croll continues, “the United States’ military expenditure is unparalleled internationally. The figures in this area augur no “change” in US policy, quite the opposite.” With expenditure of almost US $580 billion, the United States accounts for almost 45 percent of total worldwide military spending. The approved base budget of the Pentagon for 2009 is—adjusted for inflation—the highest since the end of the Second World War and thus higher than at any time during the Cold War. The Obama Administration’s budget proposal for 2010 once again foresees a real-term increase of four percent compared with the previous year.

In absolute terms, the United States is followed by China (US $140 billion), Russia (US $78.8 billion), India (US $72.2 billion) and the United Kingdom (US $54.7 billion) as countries devoting the most resources to their armed forces. Newly industrializing countries in the Asian region—such as Indonesia and Malaysia—are also demonstrating high rates of growth.

German arms expenditure and exports reach a new peak

According to Marc von Boemcken, BICC’s Project Leader in the field of arms data, “the German defense budget has increased steadily since 2006.” Following an increase of €1.7 billion from 2008 to 2009, it has now peaked at around €31.2 billion. A considerable proportion of the military budget—€5.3 billion—is intended for the purchase of new weapons systems. This means that investments to procure new weapons have risen by 25 percent since 2007. Following parliament’s approval of plans to increase the number of German troops in Afghanistan from 3,500 to 4,500 soldiers in October 2008, one can also expect the cost of military missions abroad—€911 million in 2007—to continue to grow over the coming years.

Germany is among the world’s leading nations as far as the global arms trade is concerned. According to the Federal Government’s latest Arms Export Report (Rüstungsexportbericht), the total value of approved licenses for German arms exports amounted to €8.7 billion in 2007, an increase of one billion Euro since 2006. The value of approved arms exports to countries which do not fulfill at least four of the EU’s criteria for arms exports increased in 2007, from €157.70 million (2006) to €203.4 million (2007). Marc von Boemcken emphasizes that the “most problematical recipient countries include in particular Oman, Egypt and Angola” and also refers to alarming supplies of arms to Pakistan (€163.8 million), Singapore (€126.3 million), India (€89.9 million) and Malaysia (€80.4 million).

The divide between arms expenditure and expenditure on development aid continues to widen

In 2007, almost 70 percent of worldwide defense spending—that is to say approximately US $920 billion—could be attributed to the 30 member states of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). By comparison, these states only spent just over US $100 billion on official development assistance. Peter J. Croll comments critically, “the ratio between investments in arms and investments in development is nine to one. This divide, which has continued to widen in recent years, is alarming.”

New surveys on state militarization

The Global Militarization Index (GMI), which BICC is presenting for the first time in its Annual Report, deals with the significance of a state’s military sector in relation to society as a whole. For example, the GMI compares a country’s military expenditure with its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and its expenditure on medical care. It contrasts the total number of military and paramilitary forces in a country with the number of doctors in that country. Finally, it considers the number of heavy weapons at the disposal of a country’s armed forces.

“A high GMI rating can indicate serious deficiencies in government,” Marc von Boemcken explains. One such example is Eritrea, which by the standards of all the criteria is the most militarized country in the world—spending more than 20 percent of its GDP on its armed forces compared with a mere 3.7 percent on public health. “This imbalance between military and social expenditure must be regarded as exceedingly problematical in view of Eritrea’s extreme poverty, which is reflected in its low level of human development,” von Boemcken stresses.

The peace researchers hope that the GMI will develop to become an aid for drawing up country assessments which are relevant for development cooperation and foreign policy as well as for further security sector research in the field of governance.

BICC (Bonn International Center for Conversion – Internationales Konversionszentrum Bonn) was founded as a non-profit limited company in 1994 with support from the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW). It is one of Germany’s five leading peace and conflict research institutes. It performs advisory activities, provides political recommendations and conducts training, all on the basis of applied research.


^ Top