Another global arms race?
The end of the World War II saw the world divided between two power blocks the West led by the US and its NATO allies representing elected democracies, and the East led by the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact countries representing Marxist-Socialist states. Although the Soviet Union and the West fought together against the Axis powers, they fell apart soon after the War on ideological issues that translated into a global struggle for power and influence. The so-called "Cold War" started; its beginning marked somewhat by Winston Churchill's "Iron Curtain" speech on 5 March 1946 in a small college in Fulton, Missouri, USA, where he said, "From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the Continent." The Cold war saw the NATO and Warsaw Pact armed forces facing each other eye to eye with nuclear weapons capable of destroying human civilization many times over. Because both sides had the capability to destroy each other in case of a nuclear showdown, it was argued that common sense would prevail and that the "balance of terror" would ensure no military conflict on a global scale. The global peace was based on "Mutually Assured Destruction", aptly acronymed 'MAD'. This however, did not prevent localised conflicts such as in Korea (1950-53), Vietnam (1959-75), Mid-east (1948 till to date) and many smaller ones across the globe. The arms race continued to gather speed until 1990 with both sides fielding newer and more sophisticated weapon systems conventional as well as nuclear. This had taken heavy tolls on the national economies, particularly of the Soviet Union. By the time of the Regan-era military build-up in the 1990s, the US with its robust economy far outspent the Soviets. Although the US defence expenditure during this period did not exceed 7% of its GDP, the Soviets spent a staggering 25% and yet could not match the US arsenal. The Soviet economy as well as the society could not bear such heavy burden for long and soon came tumbling down. The tearing down of the Berlin Wall in 1990, the collapse of the socialist system, and soon thereafter, the break up of the Soviet Union marked the end of the "Cold War." The end of the Cold War saw the emergence of a unipolar world with the USA as the sole superpower the only power with a global reach and capability and a willingness to exercise it. A new world order was in the making. Prof Francis Fukuyama wrote, "What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government" (The End of History and the Last Man, 1992). It would be a world led by the US where democracies would live in peace and harmony "freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, and more secure in the quest for peace. An era in which the nations of the world, East and West, North and South, can prosper and live in harmony" (President George H. W. Bush, 1990). For few years, it looked as if a generally peaceful world had emerged. In the period 1990-98, the world military expenditures more than halved mainly due to cutting down of the defence budget of NATO and old Warsaw Pact countries. During this period, the military budget in North America and Europe declined by 30% and 55% respectively. Defence as a percentage of GDP declined in the USA from 6.1% in 1985 to 3% in 2000 (Military Balance 2001-2002, Published by Oxford University Press for The International Institute for Strategic Studies, London, 2003, p. 299). Throughout the West as well as in the old Soviet block countries there was drawdown of conventional as well as nuclear forces bases closed down, number of troops reduced, aircraft and ships retired, plan for new weapon systems scrapped. The Americans and the Russians drastically reduced their strategic nuclear forces and brought those forces to "Stand-down" status. While the world was waiting for the "Peace Dividend" due to reduction of defence expenditures in the US and Europe, there was, in fact, increase in defence expenditures in the Middle East (ME), South Asia and Africa. In the ME, Arab-Israeli conflict, Iraq's occupation of Kuwait in 1991, and the US led "Operation Desert Storm" that followed sharply raised the military expenditures in that region. Indo-Pak rivalry over Kashmir continued to push military expenditure in the region. The whole of Central Africa gradually sank into endless military conflict. While during the Cold War, both the US and USSR tried to keep a lid on the regional trouble spots; with the end of the Cold War, all restrains were removed and the old rivalries returned with vengeance. We saw its ugly face in the Balkans (1991-1999) where worst massacre and atrocities in Europe since the end of the WW II happened. "Ethnic cleansing" was added in the political vocabulary. Despite the regional rise in military expenditures, the global expenditures continued to fall until 1998 mainly due to fall in the US, NATO and the Russian military expenditures. The chart below illustrates the point. The global military expenditures rose from US$ 800 billion in 1998 to US$ 1.47 trillion in 2008. There were a number of factors responsible for the rise. First was the continuing crisis in the ME. The first Gulf War (January March 1991) between the US-led coalition and the Iraqi forces put a heavy demand on human resources and armament on all warring sides. Expended weapons and ammunitions had to be replenished often with newer, more sophisticated and costlier versions. Arab-Israeli conflict and later the rise of Saddam Hussein in Iraq saw huge military orders pouring out of ME costing billions of dollars. For example, a single arms deal named "Al-Yamamah" that the Saudis signed in 1989 with the British Aerospace cost more than £ 80 billion. By the turn of the century, Russia under Vladimir Putin had come out of its economic crisis and could once again rearm and rebuild its defence forces. Russian military expenditure that was US$ 33 billion in 1988 plummeted to only US$ 9 billion in 1998. This has since then been rising and in 2008 stood at US$ 70 billion. Awash with energy-generated cash, Russia could once again flex its muscle. Meanwhile, continuing eastward expansion of NATO, especially losing some of her former Warsaw Pact allies to the west causes a lot of heartburn in Moscow. Russia once again feels encircled and threatened politically, if not militarily. The latest pinprick has been the decision by the US to install a missile early warning system in Poland and the Czech Republic. The West argues that the aim is to defend Europe against a possible long-range missile attack from 'rogue' states such as Iran or North Korea. Russia, on the other hand, sees it as a threat to her own missile force's credibility. Despite Russian objection, the US is going ahead with the project. Most dramatic rise in military expenditure has been in case of China from US$ 12 billion in 1999 to US$ 122 billion in 2008. China, whose military forces have stagnated for long, is now rearming and modernising with frenzy. The Chinese leadership, emboldened by the rapid rise of the economy, is now consolidating their armed forces. In its annual report to Congress on China's military strength, published in May 2008, the Pentagon said China's "expanding military capabilities" were a "major factor" in altering military balances in East Asia. It said China's ability to project power over long distances remained limited. But it repeated its observation, made in 2006, that among "major and emerging powers" China had the "greatest potential to compete militarily" with America. China had imported around $11 billion of weapons between 2000 and 2005, mainly from Russia. Despite these modernisation and reorganisation, the Chinese military continues to lag far behind western technology and doctrinal advances and would pose little challenge to the US dominance in the Asia-Pacific region in the near future. The most significant factor contributing to the rise of global military expenditure has been the Global War on Terror (GWOT), intensified since 9/11 attack on the US in 2001. In the aftermath of that attack, the US and other western powers got involved first in Afghanistan to drive out the Talibans and hunt down Osama Bin Laden, and then in Iraq to overthrow Saddam Hussein. The war in Iraq had so far estimated to cost $560 billion for the USA alone, much of it in military hardware and most of it after the fall of Saddam Hussein. The Iraq War has changed the geo-strategic scenario in the ME. After many centuries of being outside the centre of power, the minority Shias are a powerful force in the ME causing anxieties in the Sunni heartland. If the Iranian quest for nuclear weapon materialises, it would spur the race for nuclear weapons in countries such as Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt and Libya. But before that happens, there is the danger of a pre-emptive strike on the Iranian nuclear sites by Israel, aided and abetted by the US forces in the region. If that happens, it might give rise to a new set of strategic issues the consequences of which are still uncertain. The War on Terror is essentially directed against numerous Islamic militant groups who are fighting the so-called 'Jihad' to establish an Islamic Caliphate from Spain to the Philippines. A host of countries of Europe, Asia and Africa have joined the US-led war. Despite their political and strategic differences, USA, Russia and China are partners in this war. The war has spurred the development of sophisticated intelligence gathering and surveillance equipment, unmanned aircraft, precision guided munitions and sensors. A new doctrine is being developed on asymmetric warfare where a modern well-armed army fights an ideologically indoctrinated group armed with light weapons and improvised explosives. Two decades after the end of the Cold War, the world is back again on high military expenditure. The unipolar world led by the US is increasingly being challenged by Russia and China, yet their military arsenal and capability are far inferior to those of the US (Chart 2). The US accounts for almost half of the world's total military expenditure. She continues to remain the only power with a global reach and capability. US along with its NATO and other allies such as Israel, Japan, South Korea, and now the new strategic partner India, represent a formidable military alliance. Although regional rivalries could result in arms race such as in the ME or South Asia, but a return to the days of the Cold War, when nuclear-armed bombers and submarines used to be on constant patrol ready for the Armageddon in minutes notice, are most unlikely. Peace-loving people of the world are disillusioned because the much-awaited peace-dividend in the "new world order" never arrived, nor the peaceful democracies flourished as expected. Although "the clash of civilization" as envisioned by Prof Samuel P. Huntington seems more and more real, there is the hope that ultimately our collective wisdom would sail us through the turbulent present to a better future.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments