The US military expenditure
It is impossible to start a war without a previous planning. All wars are large businesses that start with the accumulation of resources, such as money and materials. The war on terrorism lead by the U.S.A after the 9/11 attacks required a significant amount of capital, which meant the US had to issue public debt due to its lack of economic resources.
Taking official figures from the Pentagon the cost of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan including the budget for 2009/2010 reach the amount of $1,04 trillions, which have fluctuated from $17 billions in 2001 to $130 billions in 2010 (See table 1).
| Table 1. US expenditure on the war against terrorism (current $ billions) | |
| 2001 | 17.0 |
| 2002 | 16.8 |
| 2003 | 81.1 |
| 2004 | 94.1 |
| 2005 | 107.6 |
| 2006 | 121.5 |
| 2007 | 171.0 |
| 2008 | 187.7 |
| 2009 | 170.0 |
| 2010 | 130.0 |
| Total | 1,043.4 |
Source: Sipri 2009 and Center Arms Control and Non-Proliferation
This total figure of $1.04 trillions is even higher than the $700 billions approved with difficulties by the Senate to bail out the financial system. In other words, the American tax money used to help the perverse financial system has cost them less than carrying out illegal wars. On the other hand, this figure is, as many analysts have put it, a great threat to the US economy. So, we should ask ourselves: would not it be more useful to spend that money on the reorganization of the economy instead of declaring wars? For instance, a universal healthcare system could benefit the economy as it would create jobs and sustain people’s health.
Joseph Stiglitz, former president of the World Bank, has estimated the actual costs of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The total figure includes in addition to the military expense approved by the Senate for both countries, all indirect costs caused by human and economic losses. It is therefore reasonable to say that one of the main sources of debt in the USA is war.
The budget approved by the Congress in 2009 allocates the budget to the Department of Defence but it also points to other military expenses out of this department. As it can be seen on table nº 2, “Missions in Iraq and Afghanistan” are the largest expenses. This year there are $170,000 millions allocated to this concept, a figure that is similar to the expenditure of 2007 and 2008. Other expenses out of the Department of Defence are the nuclear weapons, in charge of the Department of Energy, or the antimissiles shield in charge of the NASA, among others (see table nº 2). In addition, the interests paid on the public debt are considered because a great source of debt comes from military expenses.
Table nº 2 shows the military budget for 2009 following two different sources of information: War Resisters League and the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. Both sources indicate that the actual military expenditure in the USA is larger than what is allocated to the Department of Defence and oscillates between $710 billions and $1.45 trillions for 2009. For 2010, the White House has given the first figures (shown in the forth column) that are around $672.3 billions.
Table nº 2: USA military budget in 2009 and 2010 (in $ billions)
| Concepts | War Resisters League(1) 2009 | CACNP(2) 2009 |
CACNP 2010 |
| Military personnel | 129.00 | 125.20 | 136.00 |
| Operations and maintenance | 241.00 | 179.80 | 185.70 |
| Acquisitions | 143.00 | 104.20 | 107.40 |
| Military R+D | 79.00 | 79.60 | 78.60 |
| Infrastructure | 15.00 | 21.20 | 21.00 |
| Military homes | 3.00 | 3.20 | 2.00 |
| Other | 4.00 | 2.20 | 3.10 |
| TOTAL (Department of Defence) | 614.00 | 515.40 | 533.80 |
| Military pensioners | 70.00 | ||
| Veterans assistance | 94.00 | ||
| Nuclear weapons (Depart. of Energy) | 17.00 | 15.60 | 8.51 |
| NASA (antimissiles shield) | 9.00 | 8.90 | |
| International security | 9.00 | ||
| National security (70% is military) | 35.00 | ||
| Department of State (military budget) | 6.00 | 5.60 | |
| Other military expenses | 5.00 | 4.40 | |
| Missions in Iraq and Afghanistan | 200.00 | 170.00 | 130.00 |
| Total Military (NATO criteria) | 1,059.00 | 719.90 | 672.31 |
| Direct public debt interests | 390.00 | ||
| TOTAL MILITARY EXPENDITURE | 1,449.00 | 719.90 | 672.31 |
1 War Resisters League has not carried out the analysis for 2010
www.warresisters.org/
2 Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation
www.armscontrolcenter.org/policy/securityspending/
The complexity of calculating the actual military expenditure is commonplace. For instance, China has a military budget spread in a myriad of departments. In Spain, the total military expenditure doubles the figure allocated to the Department of Defence (the Spanish military expenditure of the last 18 years can be found in www.centredelas.org).
Table nº 3: The Spanish military budget (2008 -2009)
| Concepts | 2008 | 2009 |
| Department of Defence | 8.492,61 | 8.240,77 |
| Department of Defense - Autonomous departments | 1.334,63 | 1.230,53 |
| National Intelligence Centre | 264,71 | 255,06 |
| Total (Department of Defence) | 10.091,95 | 9.726,36 |
| Retired soldiers | 3.184,35 | 3.298,14 |
| ISFAS (Other Departments) | 565,60 | 602,53 |
| Guardia Civil (paramilitary) (Home Office Department) | 2.893,37 | 2.941,51 |
| R+D military (Department of Industry) | 1.308,57 | 1.149,92 |
| NATO and UEO (Department of Foreign Affairs) | 7,8 | 56,57 |
| Total Military (NATO/SIPRI criteria) | 18.051,64 | 17.775,03 |
| Direct public debt interests | 858,68 | 834,57 |
| TOTAL MILITARY EXPENDITURE | 18.910,32 | 18.609,60 |
For instance, SIPRI estimates that the world military expenditure in 2007 was $1.34 trillions. However, it also uses an indicator that gives a different perspective to this figure. This indicator is the purchasing power parity (PPP), which shows the real value of the spending and allows comparisons among countries. SIRI has calculated the military expenditure of the top 15 countries, which is $1.2 trillions, and therefore it is quite likely that the total military expenditure in PPP is larger. Another source, The Military Balance 2008, says that the world expenditure in 2007 was $1,47 trillions.
To sum up, on one hand, the actual military spending in the world is larger than what is say as figures are frequently manipulated. It is very probable that the figure reaches $2 trillions, far above what research centres state. On the other hand, this huge amounts of resources could be invested in sustainable projects that would help us get over the current crisis and would stop the arms race we have started, which will only lead to more political tensions and probably wars as well.
