modern militarism

Global military spending this year will be (NZ)$1,887,600,000,000; that is equivalent to $3,591,324 every minute of every day.



The military budget of the United States alone for the current financial year is $752,620,000,000. This is more than three times greater than the combined military spending of those nations which the US government considers to be its enemies (China, Russia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, North Korea and Cuba).



Every dollar that is spent by the military, is a dollar taken from taxpayers. It is a dollar which could be used to promote life, not death. Less than nineteen days of global military expenditure is all it would take to meet the additional cost of providing access to adequate food, clean water and safe sewers, basic health care, reproductive health care for women, and basic education for everyone around the world.



Unfortunately, financial impoverishment is not the only cost of militarism and war. In war, the other costs are obvious: physical and psychological injury, loss of life and human potential, destruction and toxic pollution of the environment, and the lethal legacy of weapons (such as landmines, unexploded bombs and shells, depleted uranium ammunition) which go on killing for years after a war has ended.



In peacetime military forces consume vast amounts of non-renewable resources, both fuel and the metals which are used to make weapons and machines for the sole purpose of blowing them up. Scientific knowledge and some of our best human resources are wasted on researching and developing new ways to kill and maim. The physical environment is destroyed by military training, and toxic wastes from weapons production and the operation of military equipment and machinery. Every stage of the production of nuclear weapons causes sickness and death as well as radioactive contamination of the environment: from uranium mining, re-processing of radioactive materials, manufacturing of the nuclear warheads, to the ultimate insanity - nuclear bomb testing. Most uranium mining and all nuclear weapons testing has taken place on land stolen from indigenous or minority peoples - their homelands and food gathering areas have been turned into radioactive wastelands.



Militarisation always results in an increase in the overall level of violence, prostitution, social dislocation, the destruction of local economies, and poverty in whichever society it occurs. Militarism, the way of thinking which says ‘might is right’, actively prevents the exploration of peaceful means of resolving conflict. The resources put into peaceful resolution of conflict are a miniscule fraction of those put into armed forces around the world.



Women are disproportionately harmed by militarism and war. In war, women are raped and forced into sexual slavery as a deliberate tactic; ‘domestic’ violence increases dramatically in war zones. Around 80% of all refugees are women, and their children, fleeing armed conflict. In peacetime, women are disproportionately affected by the loss of social services as resources are diverted to armed forces.



The human spirit and enjoyment of life is damaged by militarism and the unhealthy belief that violence can ever solve anything, as Dora Russell so aptly said "it murders the generous impulses of the heart". Military preparedness does not enhance human security in any way. Instead, it endangers us all.

 



The primary beneficiaries of militarism and war are the arms dealers (operating ‘legally’ or illicitly) and the corporations which manufacture weapons. The profits of the three biggest US weapons manufacturers in 1999 were: Lockheed Martin - $3,872,000,000; Boeing - $2,662,000,000 (sales of military aircraft and missiles); Raytheon - $977,680,000.



These obscene profits were assisted by Pentagon Prime Contract Awards (US government contracts, PPCA figures do not include contracts where the corporation is a subcontractor). In 1999, via PPCA, US taxpayers funded the war production of these three corporations to the tune of: Lockheed Martin - $30,734,000,000; Boeing - $28,072,000,000; Raytheon - $15,488,000,000.



The secondary beneficiaries are those politicians who use violence, intimidation and fear for their short term political aims and moment of glory; and those governments who believe their national interests must be protected by killing others. Sometimes these people are of course the same people who profit from the arms trade.





Rooum with a view, ã Donald Rooum / Peace News March-May 2000, used with permission.

The 1999 United Nations Human Development Report states that threats to human security are being exacerbated by globalisation. In part this is because of the intimate linkage between the arms manufacturers and other transnational corporations (TNCs) - weapons are a highly profitable business as already noted. As well, the imposition of the International Monetary Fund's Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs) has required, in many countries, the use of physical force by agents of the state which has fuelled the purchase of small arms and riot control hardware. At the same time, SAPs also require nations to reduce basic social services necessary for their peoples' survival.



There has been direct collusion between some TNCs and occupying armed forces, for example the owners of the Freeport mine in West Papua paid $96,800,000 to the Indonesian military last year.



The rules of the World Trade Organisation, which favour corporate rights above human rights, do not permit government subsidies to protect local industries - except those for military purposes. In 1996 the US government subsidised arms exports by $19,118,000,000. The operation of the WTO ensures that military economies are favoured over civilian economies. The wealthy industrialised countries use military spending to subsidise corporations, promote regional development through defence contracts, and maintain an industrial knowledge base through weapons research and development.

 

Although Aotearoa / New Zealand is comparatively un-militarised when compared with other countries around the world, militarism is a dominant pervasive ideology here too.



The military budget for the current financial year is $1,630,000,000 - and a further $736,439,000 has recently been given to the army for new armoured vehicles and radios. This year’s known military spending is therefore $2,366,439,000 which averages out to $6,483,394 every day. In contrast, the Disarmament Division subsumed within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade has an annual budget of $2,990,000.



Armed forces recruiting advertisements offer young people: ‘Trades training second to none’; ‘a future’; ‘a degree; and state “Some Bursary students take a degree. Smart Bursary students get sponsored through their degree, gain management skills and walk into an Officer’s job at the end of it” [their emphasis]. It is a stunning indictment on our society that our children’s futures, their chance of trades training, and the opportunity to gain a degree without incurring crippling student debt can only be achieved by learning to kill - such is the insidious power of militarism.



There has never been an open public debate about why we even have a ‘defence force’. Given the lack of any identifiable enemy with the military capability to invade, it is bizarre that we continue to pour resources into the armed forces.



The current government believes that we need a ‘defence force’ for peacekeeping (for example, in East Timor) and has allocated $4,000,000 for UN peacekeeping duties this year. This disguises the actual cost, that is, the full military budget. It also obscures the real problem. The lesson to be learnt from what happened in East Timor is not that the NZ military should be re-armed; it is rather that Indonesia should be disarmed.



Additionally, of the 188 nations in the UN, 186 have armed forces which can be called on for UN peacekeeping duties if required - it is not necessarily a role which we need to take. We could instead explore the possibility of a civilian peace building organisation. This could include a paid professional core with voluntary assistance from those in relevant professions (such as health professionals, engineers, persons trained in peaceful resolution of conflict or trauma counselling) which could offer practical assistance to conflict ridden communities to prevent the outbreak of armed conflict, and which could provide practical assistance to communities following armed conflict.



This would put us in the position of offering something unique and of constructive positive value to the global community. In addition, it would be much cheaper to maintain and operate than armed forces which are reliant on expensive non-productive military hardware.

Aotearoa / New Zealand is not a major contributor to the arms trade. Nevertheless, the armed forces are an end user of the international arms trade whenever they purchase new or used weapons or equipment. The NZ government contributes to global weapons transfers whenever it on-sells used or surplus weapons - in the past, this has tended to be small arms (which, despite their innocent sounding name, are the greatest killer in armed conflict globally). However, in the near future the airforce’s Skyhawk warplanes are likely to be sold to the highest bidder which is a matter for serious concern.



Also of great concern has been the deliberate promotion and development of the production of military equipment, weapons and missile guidance system parts, and shoot-to-kill training equipment for overseas export. These are politely referred to as ‘defence technologies’ exports.

As this graph shows, the value of these exports more than doubled from 1996 to 1998. This is due in part to Trade NZ (the government funded export body). They set up a Defence Technologies Joint Action Group and have used taxpayer’s money to actively assist the companies involved to expand ‘defence technology’ exports. Trade NZ spent $75,000 on promoting ‘defence technologies’ in the 1997/98 financial year; $50,000 in 1998/99; and $30,000 in 1999/00.

 



We all do. Security continues to be perceived in its narrowest sense, as military security, rather than human security which comes from social justice, peace, human rights, a clean safe environment, and an economy which works for everyone. In reality, military security works against human security by diverting resources (economic, physical and social) away from meeting the needs of the people. It is not acceptable for $3,591,324 to be spent every minute on weapons and preparations for war - it is a Crime Against Peace (as defined by the Nuremberg Tribunal). It is an obscenity.



The primary principle of the United Nations Charter is: to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, and to live together in peace with one another as good neighbours. Governments and those whose wealth comes from death and destruction have turned this into a cruel joke. It’s time to stop preparing for war and start preparing for peace.

 

• Join us in saying NO to militarism and war; and YES to the kind of world you want to live in, share your vision of a better world at http://www.peace.org.nz/sayno
  
  


• Stay informed about militarism and war - use alternative media sources such as PMA’s email alerts and their website
  
  


• Put up a display in your local library or community centre or school - this could be something as simple as pinning up a copy of the A4 poster advertising Saying NO to militarism and war, or the fact sheet, or as elaborate as your imagination can devise!
  
  


• Have a table at your work, your school, in the local community centre, in the local shopping centre or other accessible venue where people can sign the 'Meet the needs of the people not the military!' postcards and get copies of this fact sheet.
  
  


• Organise a vigil or protest outside your local hospital, school, kindy, woman's refuge … wherever a community service has been put at risk because funding has been withdrawn or is insufficient. You could point out how the service would benefit from a diversion of funds from the military budget.
  
  


• Write to the Editor of your local paper or the nationally distributed press either saying NO to militarism and war, or YES to your alternative vision; or phone your local radio talk back show to do the same.
  
  


• Lobby politicians to start choosing alternatives to militarism and war, there are always ideas of things to tell politicians (and their contact details) in PMA’s email alerts and on the website.
  
  


• If you don’t have time to write letters, use resources such as the 'Meet the needs of the people not the military!' postcards - they don’t even need a stamp!

For more information or to order resources, you can contact: Say NO, PO Box 9314, Wellington, Aotearoa / New Zealand or pma@xtra.co.nz. Paper copies of this fact sheet (a slightly shorter version) are available at $1 each; ‘Meet the needs of the people not the military!’ postcards are .30c each. All orders must include payment, cheques for resources or donations should be in $NZ should be made payable to PMA.

All $ figures in this fact sheet are in NZ$; where the original amounts were in US$, they have been converted at the rate of .41cUS / $1NZ. Facts are from the publications of: UNICEF, United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Department for Disarmament Affairs, SIPRI, World Policy Institute, International Network on Disarmament and Globalisation, WILPF Submissions, Peace Movement Aotearoa publications, NZ government statements and Hansard.



For more infos:  Converge.Org.NZ

~GlobalPeace&Solidarity~