PERMANENT ARM$ ECONOMY

SIPRI: Saudi Arabia largest importer of arms, US biggest exporter

Over a third of the global weapons sold worldwide during the past five years came from the United States. About half of US arms transfers went to the Middle East



About 50% of weapons sold by the US went to the Middle East


The US accounted for 37% of global arms sales during the 2016-2020 period and sold arms to 96 countries. Almost half of its sales went to the Middle East, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) said in a report on Monday. US exports increased 15% compared to the 2011-2015 period.

International deliveries of arms were flat in the period 2016-2020, ending more than a decade of increases, SIPRI said. It was the first time since 2001–2005 that the volume of deliveries of major arms between countries — an indicator of demand — did not increase from the previous five-year period.

The United States, France and Germany — three of the world's biggest exporters — increased deliveries but falls in exports from Russian and China offset the rise, SIPRI said.

Russia is the world's second-largest arms exporter, while France stood third, according to the report. Russia's sales were dented by a drop in imports from India.

Saudi Arabia tops as largest importer

Middle Eastern countries accounted for the biggest increase in arms imports, up 25% in 2016–20 from 2011–15.

Saudi Arabia, the world's biggest arms importer, increased its arms imports by 61% and Qatar by 361%.

The United Arab Emirates recently signed an agreement with the United States to purchase 50 F-35 jets and up to 18 armed drones as part of a $23 billion package.

Asia and Oceania were the largest importing regions for major arms, receiving 42% of global arms transfers in 2016–20. India, Australia, China, South Korea and Pakistan were the biggest importers in the region.

"For many states in Asia and Oceania, a growing perception of China as a threat is the main driver for arms imports," said Siemon Wezeman, a senior researcher at SIPRI.

COVID impact too early to tell

SIPRI said that it was too early to tell whether a recession stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic could slow down arms deliveries.

"The economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic could see some countries reassessing their arms imports in the coming years. However, at the same time, even at the height of the pandemic in 2020, several countries signed large contracts for major arms," said Wezeman.

am/sri (dpa, Reuters)

Global Arms Trade Plateauing Amid COVID-19 as Sales Gap Between US, Russia Widens – SIPRI

 

Global Arms Trade Plateauing Amid COVID-19 as Sales Gap Between US, Russia Widens – SIPRI

Lance Cpl. Juanenrique Owings

MILITARY & INTELLIGENCE

06:13 GMT 15.03.2021Get short URL

by Igor Kuznetsov

 

Substantial increases in arms sales by three of the top five exporters (the US, France, and Germany) were largely offset by declining Russian and Chinese exports, as the COVID pandemic is yet to take its economic toll on nations and affect their arms procurements.

International trade in major arms has levelled off over the past two five-year periods, with the exception of the Middle East, where there has been a sharp increase, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute SIPRI has said in a fresh report.

Nevertheless, global arms trade has remained close to the highest level since the end of the Cold War in the early 1990s, when the Soviet Union collapsed. Whether there has been a break in trends on the global arms market, SIPRI's researchers are still hesitant to say.

"It is too early to say whether the rapid growth of arms transfers in the last two decades is over, Pieter Wezeman of SIPRI's research programme for weapons and military spending in the city of Solna, told national broadcaster SVT.

SIPRI, however, did not rule out the coronavirus pandemic possibly affecting the statistics for an entire five-year period.

"The economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic may, for example, cause some countries to re-evaluate their arms imports in the coming years. At the same time, however, several countries have signed major arms contracts in the midst of a burning pandemic", Wezeman said.

With 96 client states, the US remains the world's largest arms exporter, increasing its global share of arms exports from 32 to 37 percent. Almost half (47 percent) of US arms transfers went to the Middle East. Substantial increases in transfers by three of the top five arms exporters (the US, France, and Germany) were largely offset by declining Russian and Chinese arms exports, SIPRI noted.

One major outlier is the Middle East, which clearly went against the trend and greatly increased its arms procurements by 25 percent during the same period. The spike is mostly due to major acquisitions by Saudi Arabia (up by 61 percent), Egypt (up by 136 percent) and Qatar (up by 361 percent).

"Ongoing wars in Yemen and Libya, rivalries between countries in the Gulf region, threats against Iran, and rising tensions over oil and gas reserves in the Mediterranean are important drivers of demand for weapons in the region", Pieter Wezeman commented.

Based in the Swedish capital, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute was founded in 1966 to provide data, analysis, and recommendations for armed conflict, military expenditures, and arms trade as well as disarmament and arms control. Their research is based on open sources and is directed at decisionmakers, researchers, the media, and the public.

To avoid statistical glitches, the researchers compare five-year stretches. This model has been in use since 1981, when the superpowers were locked in the Cold War and armed themselves to unprecedented levels.

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for PERMANENT ARMS ECONOMY 

Russia Can’t Afford To Continue Exporting Arms

By RFE/RL staff - Mar 13, 2023

• Russian arms exports have collapse in recent years. 
• 
  
• The Kremlin’s need to conserve weaponry for its war in Ukraine, along with western sanctions are crushing its ability to sell arms.
• 
  
• The United States has increased arms sales, with its share rising to 40%.

Russia’s share of global arms exports declined sharply in the most recent five-year period, as Western sanctions against Moscow and the Kremlin's own need to conserve weaponry for its ongoing war effort in Ukraine limited sales abroad, new data from an influential research group showed.

Russia’s share of global arms exports declined from 22 percent in the 2013-17 period to 16 percent in 2018-22, according to a report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) published on March 13.

Meanwhile, the United States remained the global leader in arms exports, with its share rising to 40 percent from 33 percent in the same five-year period.

"It is likely that the invasion of Ukraine will further limit Russia's arms exports," said Pieter Wezeman, a senior SIPRI researcher.

“This is because Russia will prioritize supplying its armed forces, and demand from other states will remain low due to trade sanctions on Russia and increasing pressure from the U.S.A. and its allies not to buy Russian arms,” he added.

SIPRI noted that arms exports worldwide have long been dominated by the United States and Russia, with the two countries ranking first and second over the past three decades.

But Russia’s gap over France, the third-biggest exporter, narrowed, with Paris’s share rising to 11 percent from 7.1 percent.

"France is gaining a bigger share of the global arms market as Russian arms exports decline, as seen in India, for example," Wezeman said. “This seems likely to continue, as by the end of 2022, France had far more outstanding orders for arms exports than Russia.”

U.S. arms exports rose 14 percent from the 2013-17 period to 2018-22, while Russia’s exports tumbled 31 percent. France’s exports rose 44 percent, mainly to states in Asia, Oceania, and the Middle East.

India received 30 percent of France’s arms in the recent five-year period, surpassing the United States as the second-largest supplier of weaponry to New Delhi.

Russian remained the largest supplier to India of arms exports and managed to increase sales to two large nations -- China by 39 percent and Egypt by 44 percent over the period.

Ukraine became the third-largest arms importer globally in 2022 as Kyiv continues to battle against the full-scale invasion by Russian forces, a major change from the nation’s actions over previous decades.

“From 1991 until the end of 2021, Ukraine imported few major arms,” the report said. “As a result of military aid from the U.S.A. and many European states following the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Ukraine became the third-biggest importer of major arms during 2022 [after Qatar and India].”

It said Ukraine accounted for 2 percent of global arms imports in the five-year period.

European NATO nations hiked their arms imports 65 percent “as they sought to strengthen their arsenals in response to a perceived heightened threat from Russia,” the report said.

“Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, European states want to import more arms, faster,” Wezeman added.

The European increase came as the global level of international arms transfers dipped 5.1 percent over the five-year period.

SIPRI, an independent international institute focusing on research into conflict, armaments, arms control and disarmament, was established in 1966.

By RFE/RL

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for PERMANENT ARMS ECONOMY 

Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe: Iranian arms dealing continued in the UK even after notorious tank deal fell apart in 1979

Published: March 22, 2022 

THE CONVERSATION

Following her release from detention in Iran, Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, held hostage since 2016, said: “what happened now should have happened six years ago”. She was referring to the fact that her release had been secured at the same time as the British government paid Iran a debt it had owed since the first day of her detention – and had in fact owed since the 1970s.

Zaghari-Ratcliffe was tragically used as a pawn in this decades-long dispute over almost £400 million.

My research has explored the history of the Anglo-Iranian arms trading relationship and has found that London continued to be a global hub for Iran’s arms purchasing efforts even after the 1979 Iranian revolution. This is perhaps surprising given what we know about Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s case. Received wisdom is that the UK failed to follow through on arms deals with Iran due to concerns over the politics and provocative actions of the new Iranian regime. These revelations from the archives make this narrative harder to swallow.
A contentious tank deal

Iran was a major customer for British weapons in the 1970s. Between 1971 and 1976, the Iranian government ordered 1,500 Chieftain tanks and 250 armoured recovery vehicles from Britain at a cost of around £650 million. These orders – and the associated funds – were lodged with British state-owned arms company International Military Services Ltd (IMS Ltd).

We can help you make informed decisions with our independent journalism.Get newsletter

At the time, Iran was dramatically expanding its arms purchases, having cashed in on the 1973 oil crisis that saw prices quadruple. The Shah of Iran – the monarch ruling the country – was using the proceeds to pursue domestic modernisation, including through defence and arms procurement. Journalist Anthony Sampson described Iran in the mid-1970s as “the salesman’s dream”. The country spent over US$10 billion on tanks, aircraft, missiles and all manner of weaponry between 1974 and 1976, and planned a further US$10 billion spend by 1981.

When the Shah of Iran was toppled in 1979, Britain did not see through on its arms deal. Alamy

The 1979 revolution that toppled the Shah saw the US halt arms sales to Iran. The UK – at least in some regard – followed suit. British tank transfers ceased and the bulk of the 1970s contract went unfulfilled. Only 185 of the Chieftain tanks ordered by the Shah had been delivered.

However, IMS Ltd held onto the Iranian government’s money – eventually said to be around £400 million when interest is taken into account. A long series of legal battles have been fought over these funds.

Zaghari-Ratcliffe was detained nearly four decades later and, over the years, the link to the 1970s tank debt has gradually emerged. Zaghari-Ratcliffe was first told that the connection was being drawn between her imprisonment and the debt by her Iranian interrogators in 2016. Meanwhile, the British government remained cagey and avoided the question of a link. Now, however, it has formally confirmed that it paid the debt in the same statement announcing the release of Zaghari-Ratcliffe and fellow detainee Anoosheh Ashoori.

The post-revolution arms network

While Britain halted the transfer of the Chieftain tanks when the Shah fell, the arms trading relationship with Iran did not cease entirely during the 1980s.

Indeed, by the time Iran was fighting a bloody war with Iraq that would last for most of the decade and claim up to a million lives, Britain, and London in particular, had a central role in Iran’s arms procurement networks.

My research shows that Iran was running a military procurement office in the heart of Westminster to supply its war machine. The office, hosted in the National Iranian Oil Company building, was located over the street from the Department for Trade and Industry, and a stone’s throw away from Westminster Abbey and the Houses of Parliament.

British government documents from 1985 note 60 to 70 arms dealers worked to broker arms deals in the building alongside over 200 oil company representatives. Contemporary press reports suggested millions of dollars of business flowed through the office, although British officials were reluctant to specify how much of Iran’s alleged US$1.2 billion annual arms purchases were handled in Westminster.

While few actual weapons systems appear to have been transferred through the offices, a search of the building in 1982 by the Metropolitan Police did uncover explosive fighter jet ejector seat parts in the basement.

Some evidence even suggests a link between IMS Ltd, the Chieftain tank deal and the Iranian offices. In the mid-1980s some spare parts for the tanks were supplied to Iran, with the name of Iran’s London office found on some leaked paperwork linked to the transaction.

The official British rules on arms transfers to Iran and Iraq during the war were complicated. Guidelines from 1984 suggested that Britain would not supply “lethal” equipment, that existing contracts should be fulfilled where possible and that transfers should not exacerbate or lengthen the conflict.

Richard Ratcliffe, pictured during his hunger strike towards the end of his wife’s captivity. Alamy

British officials were well aware of the Iranian office, and were frequently pressured to act against it by the US government. However, British intelligence struggled to understand what exactly was going on inside the building, and no clear evidence could ever be found of a breach of British law.

The desire to avoid a diplomatic spat with Iran but also the potential for a flourishing commercial relationship with Iran in other areas –- particularly supplying the National Iranian Oil Company – prevented British action.

It was only in 1987, following a series of Iranian provocations, including attacks on oil tankers and British diplomats in Tehran, that Margaret Thatcher’s government pulled the plug on Iran’s arms dealing operations in Westminster.
Insights from the archives

It is clear that challenging diplomatic relations and international sanctions on Iran over recent decades have made resolving the tank debt complicated. But the largely forgotten story of Iran’s London arms procurement office makes the British government’s unwillingness or inability to pay somewhat challenging to comprehend. Any narratives that suggested it was impossible to engage with the question of the debt skip over rather a lot of other activities that continued throughout the period in question.

I’ve been able to scrape together information about Iran’s audacious 1980s procurement operation at the heart of Westminster thanks to the rules that make government records public after 30 years. In another 30 years’ time, the archives might help to shed some further light on the events of 2022, as well as the years Zaghari-Ratcliffe and Ashoori spent imprisoned. They might tell us why it took so long for them to be reunited with their families.

Author

Daniel Salisbury
Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Science and Security Studies, King's College London
Disclosure statement
Daniel Salisbury receives funding from the Leverhulme Trust.

PERMANENT ARMS ECONOMY

https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=PERMANENT+ARMS+ECONOMY

Europe’s arms imports nearly double, France overtakes Russia as world’s second-largest exporter

By Euronews

Published on 11/03/2024 - 

Much of the growth in arms imports by European countries between 2019 and 2023 is due to the massive transfers of weapons to Ukraine in 2022 and 2023, according to a recent study.

European countries have nearly doubled their arms imports between 2014-2018 and 2019-2023, boosting their purchases by 94% in the period observed, according to a new study by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

Much of this increase was due to the transfers of arms to Ukraine, which is still fighting off the Russian invasion and which, between 2022 and 2023, received 23% of the region’s arms import in 2019-2023.

Two European countries - France and Italy - have also significantly stepped up their exports in the same period, finding willing buyers in Europe, Asia and the Middle East.

Perhaps surprisingly seeing the current situation in Europe and the rest of the world, with the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, the global volume of international arms transfers fell slightly by 3.3% between 2014-2018 and 2019-2023.

Who’s Europe buying arms from?

The largest importer in Europe was by far Ukraine, which accounted for 23% of all Europe’s imports between 2019 and 2023. The next biggest importers were the UK (11% of all European imports) and the Netherlands (9.0%).

A majority of 55% of the arms imports by European countries between 2019-2023 came from the US, whose exports to Europe were up 35% compared to the previous timeframe analysed, 2014-2018. Other major arms imported to Europe between 2019 and 2023 came from Asia, Oceania and the Middle East.

“Many factors shape European NATO states’ decisions to import from the USA, including the goal of maintaining trans-Atlantic relations alongside the more technical, military and cost-related issues,” SIPRI Director Dan Smith explained in a press release. “If trans-Atlantic relations change in the coming years, European states’ arms procurement policies may also be modified.”

The next largest supporters after the U.S. were Germany (6.4%) and France (4.6%).

The rise of France’s arms exports

The US and France currently dominate global arms exports, with Washington having grown its exports by 17% between 2014-2018 and 2019-2023 and Paris by 47% in the same period.

The US alone was responsible for 42% of the total global arms exports, delivering arms to 107 states between 2019 and 2023, more than any other major exporters. The rise in French arms exports, on the other hand, was mainly due to the delivery of combat aircraft to India, Qatar and Egypt.

For the very first time, France was ahead of Russia in the list of largest arms exporters in the world, ranking second where Russia ranked third. That’s because while France’s exports climbed, Russia’s exports halved (-53%) in the same period. While Russia exported to 31 states in 2019, the number dropped to only 12 in 2023.

The largest share of France’s arms exports (42%) went to countries in Asia and Oceania, while another 34% went to Middle Eastern states. 

The largest recipient of French arms exports was India, with nearly 30% of all exports. The country was the world’s top arms importer between 2019-2023 - though its main supplier remains Russia, which accounted for 36% of all its imports.

“France is using the opportunity of strong global demand to boost its arms industry through exports,” said Katarina Djokic, a researcher at SIPRI. “France has been particularly successful in selling its combat aircraft outside Europe.”

Other countries - including another European one - saw their arms exports increase in the past three years. In Italy, arms exports grew by 86%, while in South Korea they climbed by 12%.

China saw arms exports slide down by 5.3%, Germany and the UK by 14%, Spain by 2.2% and Israel by 25%.

Who’s Europe selling arms to?

Together with the US, Western Europe accounted for 72% of all arms exports in 2019-2023, while alone Europe was responsible for about a third of global arms exports, including large volumes going outside the region.

A total of five European countries, excluding Russia, were among the top 10 largest exporters in the world, including France (2nd place), Germany (5th place), Italy (6th place), UK (7th place) and Spain (8th place). The Netherlands were in 12th place, followed by Sweden (13th), Poland (14th), Switzerland (17th), Ukraine (18th), Norway (19th) Belgium (22nd) and Belarus (23rd).

Some 30% of international arms transfers went to the Middle East in 2019-2023, with the top three buyers in the region being Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Egypt. The majority of arms imports by Middle Eastern states were supplied by the US (52%), followed by France (12%), Italy (10%) and Germany (7.1%).

The biggest importers in 2019-2023 were India, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, followed by Ukraine, which has received major transfers of arms from over 30 countries between 2022 and 2023.

The US and Germany accounted respectively for 69% and 30% of arms imports by Israel, which is currently fighting a deadly war against Hamas in Gaza which killed over 30,000 people, most of whom were civilians.

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for PERMANENT ARMS ECONOMY 

Growing influence of BRIC's in East Africa through arms race


MONDAY SEPTEMBER 04 2023


A Russian tank in a firing exercise field. 


By JULIUS BARIGABA
More by this Author


countries. Yet, new details show that arms supply is just as much the bloc’s area of specialisation, to eastern African countries.

The Brics arms race, it turns out, is already playing out in eastern Africa as new data indicates that in 2021 and 2022, Uganda and Rwanda were the biggest importers of Russian arms, while Ethiopia and Tanzania sourced their military firepower from China.

This is according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sipri) arms transfer database.

In its August update — dated just before the August 22-24 Brics Summit in South Africa — Sipri, showed that Russia and China dominate supplies while India is the bloc’s and the world’s biggest arms importer. Sipri often research and maps conflicts, arms control and purchases.

Read: Russia passes China in sub-Saharan Africa arms supply

The update studied arms transfers for the period 2008 — 2022, to see whether the trend of trading between Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa — which until the formal admission of six new members constituted the Brics group — is also reflected in arms trade between themselves.

Related

South Africa's 'Putin problem' now a headache to Brics bloc

US warns over China plan for Kenya army bases


According to Sipri, the Brics is an important economic bloc and trade between its members is growing. Data shows that Russia has remained the top supplier of arms to India in the last 14 years, while the Asian nation was also the number one export market for Russian arms exports.

“However, Russia’s share fell from 78 percent in 2008-12 to 45 percent in 2018-22, while France, Israel and USA all gained ground,” the think tank explains.

According to Sipri, China receives most of its major arms imports from Russia and was ranked the number two market for Russian arms exports in 2008-2022, but the Asian giant is becoming less reliant on arms imports, including from Russia as its domestic arms industry grows rapidly.

While India was the world’s number one importer of major arms from 2008 – 2022, China ranked third while other Brics members imported much smaller volumes, ranking 36th, 55th and 63rd for Brazil, South Africa and Russia respectively, according to Sipri.

In terms of exports, Russia, ranked number two globally after the US, while China was number five, with India, Brazil and South Africa having relatively small domestic arms industries but keen to increase their exports.

In East Africa, Uganda was ranked Russia’s biggest market in 2022, importing weapons worth $48 million out of a total import bill of $55 million, according to Sipri’s trend indicator values. Its other sources were Czechia ($4 million), Israel ($2 million), China ($1 million) and South Africa ($1 million).

Read: Ethiopia region’s biggest military spender in 2022

In 2021, Rwanda imported arms worth $46 million from Russia, $10 million from turkey and $2 million from the US.

In 2022, Ethiopia imported weapons valued at $35 million from China, while the previous year, its arms were sourced from Turkey ($5 million) and $6 million worth of weapons from unknown sources.

In 2021, Tanzania imported arms worth $29 million from China and also sourced weapons worth $24 million from France.

Somalia and the Democratic Republic of Congo sourced their arms from South Africa; Kenya and South Sudan are the only countries from region whose military supplies are not sourced from a Brics member during this period.

In 2009, Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa formed the bloc to counter western dominance in geopolitics, and to promote peace, security, development and cooperation; the inclusion of new members Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates is meant to share these goals wider.

Scholars view the Brics emergence as critical to establishing a new world order to bridge the widening gap between the actual role of emerging markets in the global system and their ability to participate in the decision-making process of global institutions.

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for PERMANENT ARMS ECONOMY 

Our global culture of war means guaranteed profits for the arms industry


For the arms industry to flourish, it needs wars, preferably protracted, destructive stalemates in far-off places

Paul Rogers
23 June 2023, 5.19pm

A missile on display at a DefExpo 2022, a defence industry trade fair in India |
T. Narayan/Bloomberg via Getty Images

While most would agree there is no such thing as a ‘good war’, those taking a calculated view might argue that such a thing would mean a quick victory with minimal losses on your own side, with the other side so defeated as to present few problems in the future. A ‘perfect war’, then, might be one where there is capitulation and complete surrender without a shot being fired.

The world’s arms dealers will take a devastatingly different view. Their primary function, like that of any other industrial endeavour in a shareholder capitalist system, is to make money for shareholders while ensuring decent salaries and even more decent bonuses for the CEO and senior colleagues.

To them, a ‘perfect war’ is one that degenerates into a violent stalemate that creates an insatiable demand for arms and the replacement of worn-out equipment, while at the same time, each side constantly tries to improve its weaponry and tactics. Profit is placed over lives, though it is arguably better if the war has relatively low casualties so that public support remains high and the war – and the money it generates – can continue.

An even ‘better’ scenario for an arms dealer is selling arms to another country that’s engulfed in an everlasting war that their own country is not fighting, and better still if they are selling to both sides at the same time.

Now carry over this line of argument to the real world of the early 21st century, and we come up with some unusual and appalling results. The US-led coalition’s war in Afghanistan was long, and the 20 years of conflict certainly helped the armourers in many countries make plenty of money, as did the shorter eight-year war in Iraq.

Neither war, though, proved particularly popular back home and both came to a catastrophic end, with hundreds of thousands of people dead and two countries wrecked – but there were still plenty of profits for the armourers.

Iraq actually turned out to be a more complicated war, with ISIS emerging rapidly from the chaos left by Western forces. By 2014 it had taken control of much of northern Iraq and Syria. A US-led coalition was rapidly put together to organise an intensive air war across the two countries, with thousands of airstrikes and cruise missile attacks over a four-year period until ISIS was crippled.

According to AirWars, some 30,000 targets were attacked using more than 100,000 missiles and guided bombs, and at least 60,000 people were killed. Some of these will have been ISIS paramilitaries, but thousands will have been civilians of all ages. However, hardly any Western military personnel were killed apart from occasional accidents, there was little media coverage except when cities such as Mosul and Raqqa were taken, so there was little public attention paid to what appeared – from a Western perspective – to be a successful war.

Even its ‘success’ is debatable, though, as around a thousand US troops are still in northern Syria, many more are in Iraq, coalition forces still carry out air strikes in both countries, and ISIS is expanding its links with like-minded Islamist paramilitaries across the Sahel and on to the DRC, Uganda and even Mozambique. That war is still not over, so the profits still roll in.

For arms dealers, a ‘perfect war’ is one that degenerates into a violent stalemate that creates an insatiable demand for arms

Returning to today, there are many conflicts around the world that arms firms are looking at and seeing dollar-signs. Let’s start with the Indo-Pacific region, where there are plenty of new opportunities for arms marketing. Chinese manoeuvres towards Taiwan are combining with greater US military activity, stimulating a veritable arms sales bonanza across southeast Asia. Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines are all investing heavily, especially in new naval forces.

Further south, Australia is integrating its military posture closely with the United States and Britain in the AUKUS programme of new nuclear-powered attack submarines, while further west, a mini-arms race is developing between India and Pakistan as each invests in new generations of air-defence missiles. According to Jane’s Defence Weekly, Pakistan’s new weapons are centred on the advanced S-400 long-range ground-launched missile from Russia.

India, meanwhile, sees issues with China but is also concerned with what it views as rather too-close links between China and Pakistan. It, too, has bought into the S-400 system but is also buying Barak-8 medium-range anti-aircraft missiles from Israel.

As for China itself, people from its own version of a military-industrial complex have had little role in the national leadership until now, but that has changed in the wake of President Xi’s re-election for a record third term: five new members of the politburo are from the military sector. China may be a hybrid state-capitalist economy but individual corporations still look to business success and their own well-being.

Then there is Russia’s war in Ukraine, which is turning out to be both long and brutal, with many catastrophes and much loss of life. Three weeks into Ukraine’s offensive in the Donbas region, casualties on both sides are high and there are already signs that the offensive is unlikely to succeed in forcing Russia to agree terms.

The Russian military sector has proved more than able to continue producing large quantities of artillery and ammunition, and the leadership has learned from some of its early errors. Putin remains in firm control and though his position could change overnight, there is little sign of this happening.

Ukraine, meanwhile, is still receiving plenty of weapons, ammunition and materiel from NATO, though much of it is very slow in coming, especially the much-desired F-16 interceptors. The war may yet last years, not months – offering ideal conditions for arms’ companies to profit.

Many such arms industry leaders may choose to view themselves as patriotic guardians of their country. But the system in which they operate raises real ethical questions, which few seem to want to answer.

Meanwhile, as the conflict in Ukraine moves slowly towards a ‘perfect war’, more people will die, more towns and villages will be levelled – all of which will simply be seen as collateral damage in our global culture of war.

THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX 

AND 

THE PERMANENT ARMS ECONOMY TODAY

https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=PERMANENT+ARMS+ECONOMY+