OBSERVARE
Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 – October 2024)
120
THE IMPLICATIONS OF INCREASING MILITARY SPENDING ON HUMAN
SECURITY: A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE
ZEKERI MOMOH
momohzekeri@gmail.com
PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science and International Relations, Faculty of Social
Science, University of Abuja (Nigeria). He is Lecturer at the Department of Political
Science and Diplomacy, Veritas University, Abuja. His area of interest is in Political
Economy, Development Studies and Strategic Studies.
Abstract
The war between Russia and Ukraine which started on the 24th of February 2022, has
heightened concerns about the implications of rising military expenditure on the spread of
weapons and world security. Since the 9/11 attacks in the United States, studies have
indicated that state military spending has increased, raising concerns among policymakers
throughout the world. Therefore, the objective of this study is to investigate how an increase
in military spending may affect both human security and the proliferation of weapons. Data
for this study were gathered from secondary sources using a historical research approach,
and content analysis was used for analysing the data. This study makes the case that
increasing military spending has detrimental effects on human security in a variety of
contexts, including the political, socio-psychological, and economic components of daily living.
On the economic front, funds that could be utilised to raise citizen welfare are instead being
spent to buy military hardware and software. In the political realm, it results in invasion and
the funding of proxy wars, while on the social front, it has sparked hostility and concerns
among nations. Lastly, this study recommended among other things that there is the need
for collective efforts by member states of the United Nations through collective security to
pressurised erring states.
Keywords
State, Budget, Military, War, United Nations.
Resumo
A guerra entre a Rússia e a Ucrânia, que teve início em 24 de fevereiro de 2022, aumentou
as preocupações sobre as implicações do aumento das despesas militares na disseminação de
armas e na segurança mundial. Desde os ataques de 11 de setembro nos Estados Unidos, os
estudos indicam que as despesas militares do Estado aumentaram, suscitando preocupações
entre os decisores políticos em todo o mundo. Por conseguinte, o objetivo deste estudo é
investigar de que forma um aumento das despesas militares pode afetar tanto a segurança
humana como a proliferação de armas. Os dados para este estudo foram recolhidos de fontes
secundárias, utilizando uma abordagem de investigação histórica, e foi utilizada a análise de
conteúdo para analisar os dados. Este estudo defende que o aumento das despesas militares
tem efeitos prejudiciais para a segurança humana numa variedade de contextos, incluindo as
componentes política, sócio-psicológica e económica da vida quotidiana. No plano económico,
os fundos que poderiam ser utilizados para aumentar o bem-estar dos cidadãos são, em vez
disso, gastos na compra de equipamento e software militares. No domínio político, resulta em
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 – October 2024), pp. 120-132
The Implications of Increasing Military Spending on Human Security: A Global Perspective
Zekeri Momoh
121
invasões e no financiamento de guerras por procuração, enquanto na frente social provocou
hostilidade e preocupações entre as nações. Por fim, este estudo recomendou, entre outras
coisas, a necessidade de esforços colectivos por parte dos Estados membros das Nações
Unidas, através da segurança colectiva, para pressionar os Estados prevaricadores.
Palavras-chave
Estado, Orçamento, Militar, Guerra, Nações Unidas.
How to cite this article
Momoh, Zekeri (2024). The Implications of Increasing Military Spending on Human Security: A
Global Perspective. Janus.net, e-journal of international relations. VOL 15, Nº.1, May-October, pp.
120-132. DOI https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.15.1.7
Article received on September 14, 2023, and accepted for publication on January 31,
2024.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 – October 2024), pp. 120-132
The Implications of Increasing Military Spending on Human Security: A Global Perspective
Zekeri Momoh
122
FROM THE IMPLICATIONS OF INCREASING MILITARY SPENDING
ON HUMAN SECURITY: A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE
ZEKERI MOMOH
Introduction
The military remains one of the key institutions of the state charged with the
responsibility of defending the state against external aggression. Therefore, the survival
of any state is more often than not left in the hands of the military. In recent years,
increasing military budgets has been considered a desideratum in securing the territorial
integrity and prevention of any act of aggression from the perceived enemy(ies) of the
state by any government.
The rising military budget for states across the world especially from 1999 and later in
2001 has attracted the attention of policymakers, researchers and scholars in
International Relations and strategic studies considering its intended and unintended
consequences on human security and development. From the realist’s perspective,
military capabilities remain one of the fundamental elements of state power. The realist
theory maintained that the ability to use military might to coerce an enemy state is far
more rewarding than obtaining favours or concessions from them. This position was
contrary to the liberal strategic thinkers who maintain that under the contemporary era
of globalisation where the global economy has been economically, politically and
culturally integrated in a way that economic might is considered valuable to national
strength and security when compared to military capabilities (Nye, 2008).
Nevertheless, one the ways to know state capability is to compare the extent to which
they spread money on acquiring military weapons; other sources of determining the
power potential of a state aside from military expenditures, include state economy,
population and territorial size, geographic location, natural resources, levels of
technological advancement, political cultural, the volume of trade, level of educational
national moral, efficiency of political decision making and domestic solidarity among
others (Kegley et al, 2011, pp. 277-278).
However, studies have shown that the use of territorial size as a criterion for measuring
the power potential of any state has been criticized. For instance, Russia's territorial
space is twice the size of countries like Canada, China, the US, Brazil and Australia; but
cannot be said to be the most powerful nation in the world but one of the most powerful
states in the world. Again, the use of population size as a criterion for measuring state
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 – October 2024), pp. 120-132
The Implications of Increasing Military Spending on Human Security: A Global Perspective
Zekeri Momoh
123
power potential has also been criticized. For instance, if population size is used as the
sole criteria for measuring state power, countries like China, India, the US, Indonesia,
Pakistan, Nigeria and Brazil would have been the most powerful countries in the world
(Kegley et al, 2011). Similarly, when the use of countries' expenditures on research and
development (especially concerning the country’s GDP) to find future economic
prosperity and military capability, countries like Israel, Sweden, Finland, Japan, the US,
South Korea, Switzerland, Demark, Germany, Australia and Singapore would be the most
powerful countries in the world (WDI, 2009, pp. 314-315).
Besides, there is a consensus among scholars in international relations and strategic
studies that power is relative. This is because some leading states in some areas of power
potential may not be leading in other areas since there are various dimensions of power
potential. Also to put into consideration, the lack of consensus on how to measure the
power potentials of states in the international system. In this study, we shall situate our
measurement of state power potentials within the context military budget and the state’s
economy. However, this criterion has been criticised because most countries in the world
with larger military arsenals have not necessarily won in most political conflicts like in
Vietnam, North Korea's seizure of USS Pueblo in 1968, Iran’s hostage-taking of American
diplomats and the Al-Qaeda terrorist 9/11 attack among others (Diamond, 2005, Kegley,
2011). Another instance is where the inability of the Soviet Union to dislodge and take
total control of political events in Afghanistan. Besides, Switzerland was against the
Habsburg Empire, the Netherlands against Spain and Greece against the Ottomans
(Kegley, 2011).
On the whole, despite the criticisms levelled against the use of military might in
measuring state power potential. The use of military might in measuring state power
potential remains one of the dominant criteria for measuring state capacity. This is so
because it served as a desideration for the successful exercise of coercive diplomacy,
especially through the use of limited force. Hinging on this background, this study seeks
to examine the implications of the increased military budget on arms, race and human
security.
Literature Review
There is growing research on the implications of increasing military spending on human
security. However, there is consensus among some scholars that state power potential
has shifted from military might (hard power) that characterized the Cold War era to
factors such as technology, external respect and reputation, education and economic
growth (Nye, 2005, p. 55), also known as soft power.
Rej et al (2023) evaluate the effects of terrorism, military spending, and capital creation
on tourism in India using data from 1980 to 2017. According to the study, there is a
reversed relationship between the two variables, with terrorist occurrences having a
positive influence on foreign tourist arrivals but their squared term having a negative
impact. Additionally, it is discovered that the amount spent on defence and its squared
term has both a negative and positive impact on foreign tourist arrivals, demonstrating
the presence of a 'U-shaped' link between military spending and foreign tourist arrivals.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 – October 2024), pp. 120-132
The Implications of Increasing Military Spending on Human Security: A Global Perspective
Zekeri Momoh
124
Using armed conflict as a moderator and adjusting for population, wealth, distance to
destination, and closeness to cultural and linguistic groups, Khalid et al. (2020)
investigated the impact of military spending on tourism for the years 1995–2015. The
research proved that supporting the military encourages tourism. By moderating the
impact of terrorists on the number of tourists in 163 countries throughout 2010–2015,
Asongu et al (2020) studied the impact of military spending. According to the study,
spending on the military affects visitors’ number.
Okafor et al (2021) investigated the impact of military spending on travel in 67 nations
between 1995 and 2013 using a gravity model. The authors discovered that spending on
the military encourages visitor traffic. Santamaria (2021) employed an unequal sample
of 167 nations using a fixed and random effect model to study the effects of terrorism
and military expenditures on tourism between 1994 and 2014. The study provided proof
that lower tourism was caused by terrorism, income, and military spending. However,
spending on the military in response to terrorism encourages traveller arrivals.
Other studies including Samitas et al. (2018) have shown that terrorism slows down
visitors to Greece by using analysis of principal components to create a tourism-related
proxy. Besides, Rauf et al (2020) looked into the links between terrorism and travel in
Pakistan. According to the study, terrorist attacks eventually discourage people from
travelling. Charfeddine et al (2020) investigated the asymmetrical impact caused by
terrorism on tourism in Turkey compared to the symmetrical effect. Similarly, Iyavarakul
(2019) used monthly data from 2004 to 2018 to examine the relationship between
terrorism and tourism in South Thailand. According to the study, incidents of terrorism
have negative impacts on tourism.
Nadeem et al. (2020) investigate the impact of terrorism, military spending, governance
frameworks, and infrastructure on tourism. The research showed that both short and
long-term growth of the tourist business are slowed by terrorism and military spending.
Asongu et al. (2019) used negative binomial regression and the system GMM to examine
the impact of terrorism, military spending, and peace on tourism in 163 countries over
the years, 2010 to 2015. The authors provided evidence that the number of visitors was
affected by political upheaval and easy access to weapons. Tourist arrivals and military
spending have a bad, but statistically insignificant, association. Liu and Pratt (2017)
looked at how much terrorist acts damaged the travel and tourism sector in 95 nations
between 1995 and 2012. According to the research, terrorist activity hinders the flow of
tourists. By utilising the information collected every quarter from 2002 to 2016 and
focusing on Pakistan.
The aforementioned reviews make it evident that the majority of empirical studies in the
literature focus on the relationship between military spending, terrorism and tourism.
Additionally, no research has been carried out using the interactional term between
military spending and human security up to 2022 in the corpus of literature. Additionally,
we found that there is a study gap in the literature when it comes to examining the
connection between military spending and human security using recent data up to 2022.
Hence, the need for this inquiry.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 – October 2024), pp. 120-132
The Implications of Increasing Military Spending on Human Security: A Global Perspective
Zekeri Momoh
125
Trend Analysis Global Military Spending
Military spending worldwide has surpassed previous highs. Thousands of hundreds of
millions of citizens are simultaneously threatened by uncommon "essential" hazards to
their security, including threats to their safety, earnings, and dignity. Investments in
people's security are more urgent than ever because of the acceleration of climate change
and the continuing loss of ecosystems. The notion of human security emphasizes
individual protection without ignoring governmental security or law and order. The
approach to human security places a strong emphasis on the need to balance financial
requirements with all significant risks and hazards, regardless of their origin. It logically
results in a review of military spending. It also takes seriously the concern that cutting
military spending may weaken state security, which has been a key impediment to
previous multilateral efforts to cut military spending (Brzoska et al, 2022).
The UNDP's Human Development Report from 1994 was the first to introduce the idea of
human security. It made the case that for peace to last, people must be free from both
fear and want: "For most individuals nowadays, an impression of insecurity arises greater
to fears regarding everyday issues compared to from a terror of a catastrophic global
event." The new worldwide priorities for human security include things like financial
security, medical safety, preservation of the environment, and protection against crime
(Brzoska et al, 2022).
The Commission on Human Security expanded on the wide definition of human security
presented by the UNDP in its 2003 report Human Security Now. According to the
commission's interpretation of the UNDP's 1994 report, human security refers to
safeguarding "the vital core of all human lives in ways that enhance human freedoms
and human fulfilment." Human security was defined as "freedom from want, freedom
from fear, and freedom to live in dignity" in the UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan's 2005
report, "In Larger Freedom: Towards Development, Security, and Human Rights for All."
This three-part definition has endured (Brzoska et al, 2022).
The Human Development Report Office of the UNDP declared in 2020 that it will be re-
examining the notion of human security. An organisation of "independent eminent
experts" provided advice to the office on examining "what "freedom from want and
freedom from fear" means today," building on the Human Development Report 1994 and
Human Security Now. A special study on the Anthropocene's new generation of
interconnected risks, how they influence human security and possible solutions will be
released in February 2022. Calls for an ambitious agenda to fit the scope of the difficulties
are made in the conclusion. Instead of tolerating disjointed approaches to security, this
necessitates systematic, ongoing, and global attention to human solidarity (Brzoska et
al, 2022).
However, World Bank categorises the following nations as being affected by (1) high-
intensity conflict based on the intensity of the war and the likelihood that governments
will invest in their military capabilities: (1) High institutional and social fragility:
Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Syria Arab Republic; (2) medium-intensity conflict: Burkina
Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq,
Mali, Mozambique, Myanmar, Niger, Nigeria, South Sudan, and Rep. of Yemen; and (3)
high institutional and social fragility: Burundi, Comoros, Rep. of Congo, Eritrea, The
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 – October 2024), pp. 120-132
The Implications of Increasing Military Spending on Human Security: A Global Perspective
Zekeri Momoh
126
Gambia, Guinea-Bis The aforementioned classification served as one of the foundation
for an examination of state expenditure trends on the military. Also, examining budget
credibility, or the extent to which governments carry out their budgets as intended (and
as approved by their legislatures), is another technique to determine how governments
prioritise certain sectors. (United Nations Women, 2022).
The Second World War (WWII) led to the emergence of the Cold War between the US
and her ally, known as the Western Bloc and the Soviet Union and her ally, on the one
hand, and, on the other hand, known as the Eastern Bloc. One of the dominant features
of the Cold War era was the arms race between the Eastern and Western Bloc. However,
the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 marked the end of the Cold, the decline arms
race and the increase in military spending, especially between the Eastern and Western
Blocs. It is also important to note that since the end of the Cold War, states and
international organisations involved in the production of both conventional and non-
conventional weapons no longer have the strategic ties that once connected them when
selling, trading, and producing their products. As a result, the spread of conventional and
non-conventional weapons has become a more prevalent issue (Ayson, 2008).
Another defining feature of the collapse of the Soviet Union was that it brought forth a
new issue. For instance, former states that were under the control of the Soviet Union
nations became independent governments like the Russian Federation, Belarus, Ukraine
and Kazakhstan just to mention a few with sizable conventional and nuclear weaponry
stockpiles (Davis, 1995). In many cases, these newly independent states had a dire need
for money and were in financial instability. They were unable to maintain or continue
housing with the arsenals that the Soviet government had left in their custody since they
were insufficient for the smaller-scale wars or unrest that these nations were anticipated
to have in the future (Keohane, 2008).
Moreover, from 1999, the world witnessed increased military spending to about 45 per
cent with an estimate of $ 1.46 trillion. By 2001, the world witnessed an average of 4
increase in military spending with an estimate of 2.4% of global GDP spent on the
procurement of weapons. This shows that $217 is spent for each person in the world on
a military budget. Besides, 2,785,000 is spent every minute on military preparedness
(SIPRI, 2009: p. 7; Kegley, 2011, p. 281).
Nevertheless, studies have shown that developed countries allocate more resources to
arms procurement than developing countries. For instance, available statistics have
shown that in 2009 the developed countries spent $1039 billion on military preparation
when compared to the developing countries that spent $193.9 billion. Again, the
developed countries of the world spend an estimate of 2.6% per cent of their GDP on
military preparedness while the developing countries spend an estimate of 2.0% on
military preparedness (WDI, 2009, p. 296).
United Nations Women Research Paper (2022) posits that the Afghan government
underspent on health spending overall for the same time by 29.7% and its budget for
immunisations by 27.4% between 2012 and 2016. Between 2009 and 2015, Burkina
Faso had an average underspending of 25.4% on immunisations and 37.8% on the entire
health system. Additionally, Niger underspent by 18.9% per cent on immunisation
between 2009 and 2016 and by almost 30% overall on health. A related study by the
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 – October 2024), pp. 120-132
The Implications of Increasing Military Spending on Human Security: A Global Perspective
Zekeri Momoh
127
United Nations Women Research Paper (2022) posits that a recent study on budget
credibility in Nigeria which is classified by the World Bank as a medium-intensity country
shows that the Ministry of Defence and the Office of the National Security Adviser to the
President in 2015 spent 65 per cent and 100 per cent of their budgetary allocation for
the 2015 fiscal year. Meanwhile, government institutions that deal with women and
youth-related issues spent 34 per cent and 50 per cent of their budgetary allocation for
the 2015 fiscal year.
It is important to note that the United Nations Women Research Paper (2022) indicates
that governments typically spend about twice as much on health as on their military in
nations that are not considered fragile or conflict-affected. The tendencies are inverted
in nations where there is war when military spending is often more than twice as high as
health spending. However, developed countries tend to spend more on social protection
due to their responsibility to their citizens' welfare since they are less prone to instability
or violence. Besides, in most developed nations, spending on education exceeds
investment on defence not until recently that there is a gradual shift, albeit the difference
is lower in in most developing countries that are prone to armed conflict and countries
under intense security threat. However, when we account for national revenue, the
propensity for conflict-affected countries to spend more on their military than on social
safety remains is also like.
Moreover, military spending accounted for roughly a quarter (24%) of the government's
investment in Afghanistan in 2019; the remaining 13% went to projects involving "public
order and safety." Comparatively speaking, less than 6% of government spending went
to the health sector, 9% went to education, and 4% went to social protection (which
includes all programmes designated as focusing on families and children). In Burkina
Faso, a nation with a medium level of conflict, the government planned more than ten
times as much on defence as for social protection in 2020 (including all programmes
designated as focusing on families and children). Similar trends were seen in Mali in
2017, another African nation with a war of moderate severity, where the authorities spent
more on the military than they did on welfare programmes. Contrarily, in most low-
income countries that aren't supposed to be affected by war, there are distinct trends.
For instance, less than 6% of total government expenditures in Senegal were allocated
to the armed forces, ensuring safety and protection in 2018, compared to 14% for
education and research, 4% for health and social services, and less than 6% for education
(United Nations Women Research Paper, 2022).
Furthermore, studies on military spending between developed and developing countries
have increased significantly over the years. For instance, the share of global military
spending from developing countries rose from 7% in 1961 to 14% in 2008 (SIPRI, 2009,
p. 209). It can be argued here that developing countries are emulating the developed
countries in terms of their military spending. The implication of this increased military
spending is that, resources that would have been used to develop other sectors of the
society are diverted for the funding of military operations. Hence making others sectors
of the economy to suffer insufficient funding. This will have negative implications on
human security. Hence, striking a balance between increased military spending and
funding research and development has been problematic for many countries.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 – October 2024), pp. 120-132
The Implications of Increasing Military Spending on Human Security: A Global Perspective
Zekeri Momoh
128
During the Cold War era (1945-1991), while countries like the US and the Soviet Union
were investing heavily in arms procurement, some countries like Japan were investing in
Research and development (R&D). Today, one of the long-term implications of increasing
military spending is that, it often leads to the neglect of other critical sectors like; science
and education or makes a country face what Friedman, 2005:6, Florida, 2007, and Kegley
et al, (2011) called "creativity Crisis".
The implication of this is that developing countries are emulating the developed countries
in terms of their military spending. Another implication of the increased military spending
is that huge resources that would have been used for research and development are
diverted for funding military preparation. This has further negative implications on human
capital development. Hence, striking a balance between increased military spending and
funding research and development has been problematic for many countries. For
instance, during the Cold War era (1945-1991) why countries like the US and the Soviet
Union were investing heavily in arms procurement, some countries like Japan were
investing in Research and development (R&D). today, one of the long-term implications
of increasing military spending is that, it often leads to the neglect of other critical sectors
like science and education, or it makes a country face what Friedman, 2005:6, Florida,
2007, and Kegley et al, (2011) called "creativity Crisis".
Again, Kegley (2011, p. 283) rightly observed that increased military spending often
results in opportunity cost. A situation where what is gained for one purpose (military
preparation) is lost for other purposes. The consequence of this, according to Kegley et
al (2011), any choice made will be a lost opportunity that must be paid for by other
sectors of the economy. In addition, studies have shown that military spending often
slows down a country’s economic growth and creates fiscal deficits. This is because a
significant amount of funds spent on arms procurement has aided the eroding of a
country’s welfare.
The table below shows the military spending of the five highest military spenders based
on their annual budgetary allocation as shown in table 1 below.
Table 1: Global Military Spending as at 2022
S/No
Country
Military Spending
1
United States
USD 766.6 Billion
2
China
USD 244.9 Billion
3
India
USD 73 Billion
4
Russia
USD 66 Billion
5
United Kingdom
USD 58.5 Billion
Source: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI, 2022).
From the table above the United States occupy the top position as the country with the
highest military budget of USD 766.6 billion. China occupies the second position with a
military budget of USD 244.9 billion. Moreover, India occupies the third position with
USD 73 billion. Besides, Russia occupies the fourth position with a military spending of
USD 66 billion and the United Kingdom occupies the fifth position with a military spending
of USD 58.5 billion. The United States of America held the top spot among the five nations
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 – October 2024), pp. 120-132
The Implications of Increasing Military Spending on Human Security: A Global Perspective
Zekeri Momoh
129
ranked in Table 1 above as the world's leading military spender as of 2022, while the
United Kingdom held the bottom spot among the five nations rated as the world's least
military spender.
Table 2: Top Ten Military Spending Nations
S/No
Country
Military Budget
Global Percentage
of Military Budget
1
United States
USD 801 Billion
37.9%
2
China
USD 293 Billion
13.9%
3
India
USD 76.6 Billion
3.6%
4
United Kingdom
USD 68.4 Billion
3.2%
5
Russia
USD 65.9 Billion
3.1%
6
France
USD 56.6 Billion
2.7%
7
Germany
USD 56.0 Billion
2.7%
8
Saudi Arabia
USD 55.6 Billion
2.6%
9
Japan
USD 55.13 Billion
2.6%
10
South Korea
USD 50.23 Billion
2.4%
11
Rest of the World
USD 536 Billion
25.3%
Source: SIPRI, 2022
From Table 2 above, the United States occupy the top position as the country with the
highest military budget of USD 801 billion with a global percentage of military budget of
37.9%. China occupies the second position with a military budget of USD 293 billion and
a global percentage of the military budget of 13.9%. Moreover, India occupies the third
position with USD 76.6 billion with a global percentage of military budget of 3.6%. The
United Kingdom occupies the fourth position with a military spending of USD 68.4 billion
and a global percentage of the military budget of 3.2%. Besides, Russia occupies the fifth
position with a military spending of USD 65.9 billion and a global percentage of the
military budget of 3.1%. France occupies the sixth position with a military spending of
USD 56.6 billion and a global percentage of the military budget of 2.7%. Germany
occupies the seventh position with a military spending of USD 56.0 billion and a global
percentage of the military budget of 2.7%. Saudi Arabia occupies the eighth position with
a military spending of USD 68.4 billion and a global percentage of the military budget of
2.6%. In addition, Japan occupies the ninth position with a military spending of USD 68.4
billion and a global percentage of the military budget of 2.6 %. Furthermore, South Korea
occupies the tenth position with a military spending of USD 68.4 billion and a global
percentage of the military budget of 2.4% while the rest of the world has USD 536 on
military spending and a global percentage of military spending of 25.3%.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 – October 2024), pp. 120-132
The Implications of Increasing Military Spending on Human Security: A Global Perspective
Zekeri Momoh
130
Table 3: Global Military Spending as at 2023
S/No
Country
Military Spending
1
United States
USD 877 Billion
2
China
USD 292 Billion
3
Russia
USD 86.4 Billion
4
India
USD 81.4 Billion
5
Saudi Arabia
USD 75 Billion
6
United Kingdom
USD 68.5 Billion
7
Germany
USD 55.8 Billion
8
France
USD 53.6 Billion
9
South Korea
USD 46.4 Billion
10
Japan
USD 46 Billion
11
Ukraine
USD 44 Billion
Source: Military News (2023)
Table 3 above shows that, with an estimated military budget of USD 877 billion in 2023,
the US will continue to spend the most on defence. With an anticipated USD 292 billion,
China remained in second place. With an estimated budget of USD 86.4 billion, Russia
comes in third place, followed by India ($81.4 billion), Saudi Arabia ($75 billion), the
United Kingdom ($68.5 billion), Germany ($55.8 billion), France ($53.6 billion), South
Korea ($46.4 billion), Japan ($46 billion), and Ukraine ($44 billion). The aforementioned
growing military budget implies that each nation increases its military spending annually.
On the whole, the implications of increasing military spending on human security are that
other sectors of the economy are neglected while much attention is spent on acquiring
more military hard and soft wares. This is particularly becoming a common trend in both
the developed and the developing countries. In contemporary times, especially since the
inversion of Ukraine by Russia on the 24th of February, 2022, states are beginning to
reconsider military might as critical for the sustenance of their territorial integrity. Today
countries are beginning to increase their military budget. Again, the increasing
militarization of the United States, Russia, China, Germany, India, Pakistan, Israel, Iran,
Turkey and non-state actors like terrorist groups who are in the business of the
production of weapons like modern aircraft, tanks and missiles. The destructive nature
of these weapons has necessitated increased military spending around the world. Also,
the growth and expansion of military industries around the world have further triggered
increased military spending to address growing security threats.
Conclusion
There is a growing concern globally today on the dangers posed as a result of increased
military arms proliferation both in the long and short run human security as well as the
stability of the international system. To this end, despite international instruments put in
place by the international community particularly under the aegis of the United Nations
to curtail to spread of various arms and aminations around the world, arms proliferation
has remained unabated among the developed countries of the world like the United
States, China, Russia, Britain, France, Japan just to mention a few that has doubled and
in some instances tripled their military budgets in curtail the rising threats posed by
perceived enemies within the international system. One of the consequences of the
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 – October 2024), pp. 120-132
The Implications of Increasing Military Spending on Human Security: A Global Perspective
Zekeri Momoh
131
increased military budget and arms proliferation on the international system as argued
in the literature is that it often led to the neglect of human security. Based on this
background, this study seeks to make some suggestions on measures to be adopted in
a bid to curb the growing military spending and arms proliferation on human security.
Recommendations
Firstly, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in collaboration with the United
Nations General Assembly (UNGA) should come up with a resolution that goes beyond
political statements to restrain arms proliferation and set a benchmark for military
spending by states.
Second, Civil Society Organisations should pressurise their home government on the
need to strike a balance between meeting the needs of the citizens and achieving
increased military spending. In this regard, this will help to limit states spending in
procuring arms and aminations.
Lastly, there is the need for global re-orientation of state leaders alone the thinking
that it is arguably safer when states limit the proliferation of nuclear, biological and
chemical weapons. This implies that existing nuclear proliferation Treaties should be
reviewed in line with current realities of nuclear proliferation.
References
Asongu, S.A. & Acha-Anyi, P.N. (2020). Global tourism and waves of terror: perspectives
from military expenditure, Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events, Vol.
12 (2), pp. 239–261.
Asongu, S.A. & Nwachuku, J. (2019). Mitigating externalities of terrorism on tourism:
global evidence from police, security officers and armed service personnel, Current Issues
in Tourism, Vol. 22 (20), pp. 2466–2471.
Brzoska, M., Omitoogun, W., & Sköns, E. (2022). The human security case for
rebalancing military expenditure. Stockholm: Stockholm International Peace Research
Institute.
Charfeddine, L. & Dawd, I. (2020). Analysis of the resilience of the Turkey tourism
industry to exogenous shocks: new evidence from a NARDL model, Tourism Recreation
Research, pp. 1–16.
Charles W Kegley, Jr and Shannon L. Blanton (2011). World Policies, Trend and
Transformation 2010-2011. Edition Boston USA; Wadsworth.
Iyavarakul, T. (2019). On the causal nexus between terrorism and tourism: empirical
evidence from the south Thailand insurgency, Development Economic Review, Vol. 13,
(1), pp. 30–41.
Liu, A. & Pratt, S. (2017). Tourism’s vulnerability and resilience to terrorism. Tourism
Management, Vol. 60, pp. 404–417.
Nadeem, M.A., Liu, Z., Xu, Y., Nawaz, K., Malik, M.Y. & Younis, A. (2020). Impacts of
terrorism, governance structure, military expenditures and infrastructures upon tourism:
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 – October 2024), pp. 120-132
The Implications of Increasing Military Spending on Human Security: A Global Perspective
Zekeri Momoh
132
Empirical evidence from an emerging economy, Eurasian Business Review
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40821-020-00152-y
Nye, Joseph S., Jr (2008). Soft power and American Foreign Policy. In Eugene. R
Wittkopt, R., Jame, M., & Cormick, C. (eds). The domestic sources of American Foreign
Policy. Lanham, Md: Rowman and Little Field, pp. 29-43.
Okafor, L.E. & Khalid, U. (2021). Regaining international tourism attractiveness after an
armed conflict: the role of security spending. Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 24 (3), pp
385–402.
Rauf, A., Siddique, H.M.A., Saleem, Q. & Sidra (2020). Terrorism and international
tourism nexus: evidence from Pakistan, International Journal of Economics and
Financial Issues, Vol. 10 (5), pp. 387–393.
Rej, S., Bandyopadhyay, A., Mallick, M.A., Inuwa, N. & Hossain, M.E. (2023).
Investigating the influence of terrorism, and military expense on tourism in India:
Empirical evidence using dynamic ARDL simulations, Int. J. Tourism Policy, Vol. 13 (4),
pp. 363–380.
Samitas, A., Asteriou, D., Polyzos, S. & Kenourgios, D. (2018). Terrorist incidents and
tourism demand: evidence from Greece, Tourism Management Perspectives, Vol.
25, pp. 23–28.
Santamaría, E. (2021). Terrorism and tourism: evidence from a panel OLS estimation,
Review of Economics and Finance, Vol. 21,107–115,
https://doi.org/10.55365/1923.x2021.19.11
SIPRI, (2009). Stockholm International Peace Research Institute SIPRI Yearbook. New
York: Oxford University Press.
United Nations Women (2022). Research paper comparing military and human security
spending: key findings and methodological notes peace and security section Un Women.
New York, May.
WDR (2009). World Development Report 2008. Washington D.C: World Bank.
