Latest news with #SIPRI
Business Recorder
2 days ago
- Politics
- Business Recorder
Defeating war mafias
'Every dollar spent on war is a dollar stolen from education, health, and climate resilience,' warned UN Secretary-General António Guterres. These are not empty words – they are a desperate plea from the head of the world's highest multilateral institution. Yet, the world continues to squander trillions, not for safety, survival, or human progress, but for destruction and death. Despite the blood-soaked history of the 20th and 21st centuries, the global obsession with militarism persists. Governments funnel precious resources into weapons of war, dragging their economies deeper into crisis while starving critical social sectors – education, health, clean water, and climate action. We stand at a dangerous crossroads. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) reports that global military expenditure reached a record USD 2,718 billion in 2024 – the most rapid rise in any single year since the Cold War. This surge comes amid escalating humanitarian crises, worsening climate disasters, and widespread poverty. The UN warns this trend directly undermines progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The contrast is horrifying: over 700 million people live in extreme poverty, More than 800 million suffer from chronic hunger, and nearly 10 percent of the world's population goes to bed hungry. Diseases flourish where clinics do not exist, and children die for lack of clean water – while drones worth tens of millions patrol the skies. Is this the hallmark of a civilized world, or one held hostage by a militarized, profit-driven logic? Each fighter jet, missile system, and bomb is more than a display of military might – it is a monument to humanity's failure to learn from its own suffering. The truth is stark: where weapons flow, peace falters; where peace is ignored, poverty takes root. The United States, China, Russia, Germany, and India lead the world in arms spending. Even Europe, once celebrated for its commitment to human development, has joined the spree – swelling the coffers of the military-industrial complex. The Middle East remains a hotbed of arms trade, with Israel ramping up its defence spending to USD 46.5 billion amid its wars in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen. In response, Saudi Arabia has raised its military expenditure to USD 80.3 billion. Fear and insecurity whether manufactured or real have become the currency of this global marketplace of destruction. War profiteers thrive in this chaos, turning human tragedy into corporate windfall. Let Gaza bleed, Ukraine burn, Tehran boil, or the people of Syria and Yemen perish – every bullet fired and every missile launched adds to their profits. This is not just an arms race; it is a symphony of suffering, orchestrated by military-industrial mafias who flourish on bloodshed and human misery. And yet, history tells us a different story. The most intractable conflicts – Vietnam, Northern Ireland, South Africa, the Balkans, even the Cold War – were resolved not by bombs, but by dialogue, diplomacy, and political courage. Why must we wait for unspeakable devastation before embracing reason? The answer lies in the military-industrial complex, a term popularized by Us President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who warned of its 'unwarranted influence' on democracy and governance. Today, that complex is global. It commands budgets larger than many national economies, manipulates foreign policy, and fuels perpetual conflicts – not for national defense, but for profit. Major arms manufacturers do not thrive in peace. They thrive in perpetual uncertainty, lobbying parliaments, shaping military doctrines, and securing contracts even in nations with no existential threats. This is no longer about national security; it is a self-sustaining ecosystem of fear, funded by public money and driven by private greed. If we truly want a world of peace, we must confront this addiction to militarization. Peace must be made strategically viable, politically rewarding, and economically sustainable. To control the arms race, bold and urgent action is needed to redirect military budgets: Diverting just 10 percent of global arms spending could end hunger, educate all and eliminate preventable diseases. Nations cutting defense budgets and investing in people should receive trade perks, debt relief, and development aid. The UN must be reformed and restructured and be freed from veto paralysis reflecting global democratic will or risk irrelevance. A strict global mechanism must hold arms suppliers and buyers accountable for weapons misuse. To world leaders, we must ask: What legacy will you leave behind? One of ruins, displacement, and despair – or one of peace, justice, and shared prosperity? The people over the globe demand a better, peaceful and a prosperous world. A peaceful world is not a utopian fantasy – it is a moral imperative. In an age defined by ecological collapse, economic inequality, and mass displacement, another century of war is unaffordable. War is not destiny. It is a choice – one rooted in greed, fear, and inertia. But peace, too, is a choice – a bold, wise, and courageous one. It must now become the collective will of humanity. Let us remember: the First and Second World Wars erased cities and generations. If we fail again, a Third World War will leave no victors – only graveyards. Victory will echo only in the silence of mass death. Let us instead build a common legacy of cooperation, dismantle the arms industry's grip on humanity, and channel our efforts toward defeating our true enemies: poverty, ignorance, disease, and climate chaos. These are the wars worth waging. Peace is not weakness. It is strength. It is survival. It is the only way forward. Let us choose it – and fight for it – together. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Deccan Herald
5 days ago
- Business
- Deccan Herald
India's balancing act in a polarised world
The recent NATO Summit in The Hague witnessed the new dawn of realism, prominently led by United States President Donald Trump and followed silently by most European partners. With a commitment to 'invest 5 per cent of GDP annually towards defence — and security-related spending by 2025', it is clear that NATO is concerned about the US' security and economic Spain has taken a tough stance by announcing to spend only 2.1% of its GDP on military, followed closely by Belgium seeking 'maximum flexibility' in meeting NATO's revised spending target. Experts point out how the 2025 NATO Declaration bluntly made no mention of 'protection and preserving the rules-based international order as laid down by the UN Charter' — a norm noticed in earlier declarations. Although security-related issues are embedded within the NATO discourse, diplomatic endeavours need to factor in aspects of inclusive growth, shared prosperity, and collective multilateral order — an element noticed in its previous iterations.A look at global outlay on defence reflects a steady increase in spending capacities of the nations. For instance, in 2024, military spending globally rose by 9.4% in real terms, amounting to $2,718 billion. This also happens to mark the tenth consecutive year of an increased global defence budget. The US, China, and Russia top the list, with India in fourth position, as per the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) Military Expenditure India, its defence capabilities are gradually expanding by way of industrial reforms, modernising armed forces, and strengthening the native defence production to meet not only its domestic needs but also for bolstering exports. Spending almost 2.3% of its GDP on defence, India allocated about $75 billion in its Union Budget geopolitical strife across the globe, including in its own backyard with terrorist strikes in Pahalgam in April, has perceptibly compelled New Delhi to focus its energies on enhancing self-reliance in military preparedness. Yet technological innovations, R&D development, and leveraging investment towards military infrastructure depend largely on a nation's fiscal framework and its strategic cordial, yet careful, stance away from a NATO membership is rooted in its historical foreign policy of non-alignment and maintaining its strategic autonomy. Instead of depending on any military alliance to aid its external security, India chooses to safeguard its borders flexibly, depending on the fast-changing regional and global in the face of increased global defence spending, development is naturally experiencing a stress test at the international scale. Talks of climate adaptation, building health resilience, energy transition and ensuring holistic sustainable development are gradually coming under intense strain. As such, Agenda 2030 appears to be in a tensions have visibly created ruptures in the global security architecture resulting in a fractured community. Real needs of the vulnerable, such as access to clean energy, nutritious food, and good health is a pivotal target for a majority of the low-income and least-developed countries. But at the same time, securing one's territorial integrity, sovereignty, and maintaining strategic autonomy is heavily reliant on cutting-edge military equipment and defence multilateral forums like the G20 and BRICS pushing forward the socio-economic development agenda of the Global South and attempting to establish a counterforce to the existing Western institutions, ensuring smooth international order is a persistent challenge. In this sense, threats by Trump to impose extra tariffs on the BRICS countries yet again underscore the economic realism aimed at capturing the currency market in global supply by both NATO and non-NATO countries alike, global spending trends on defence possibly enforce the reprioritisation of security over development. Yet it's a catch-22 situation. As one of the prominent partners and fastest-growing economies in the world, the big question remains — is India ready to deal with the economic trade-offs associated with welfare and larger developmental targets and defence spending?Swati Prabhu is Associate Fellow at the Observer Research Foundation.
Time of India
5 days ago
- Automotive
- Time of India
India, US, China or Pakistan: Which country has the most combat tank fleet? List of top 10
Combat tanks have become a vital part of a nation's military strength. These powerful war machines are designed to dominate on the battlefield with their thick armour, powerful guns, and ability to move across difficult terrain. But which country in the world has the largest fleet of combat tanks in 2025? Let's find out in this list of top 10 countries with the most combat tank units. What is a Combat Tank? A combat tank is a heavily armoured vehicle that carries powerful weapons and moves on metal tracks instead of wheels. The design helps it move over rough land, making it useful in warzones. Tanks were first introduced during World War I, with Britain creating the world's first functional tank called Little Willie. Since then, tanks have become more advanced, faster, and stronger. A Brief History of Tanks in Warfare The idea of using vehicles in war is not new. Thousands of years ago, ancient Egyptians used horse-drawn chariots during battles. Later, in the Middle Ages, people used armoured wagons and battering rams. But the invention of the modern-day combat tank changed everything. It allowed armies to break through enemy lines and added a new level of power to ground forces. Military Spending and the Rise of Combat Tanks According to a report from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), global military spending increased by 37% between 2015 and 2025. Many countries are now investing in air defence and land forces. Adding more combat tanks to their armies is one of the main strategies to strengthen their military power. Top 10 Countries with the Most Combat Tanks in 2025 Here's a look at the top 10 countries with the largest combat tank fleets in 2025: 1. China – 6,800 Tanks China tops the list with a massive fleet of 6,800 combat tanks. The Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) owns the world's largest number of main battle tanks (MBTs) currently in service. This reflects China's focus on becoming a leading global military force. 2. Russia – 5,750 Tanks Russia holds the second position with around 5,750 tanks. One of its most powerful tanks is the T-14 Armata, a fourth-generation main battle tank built on the Armata Universal Combat Platform. Despite economic challenges, Russia continues to invest in armoured strength. 3. United States – 4,640 Tanks The United States ranks third with a total of 4,640 combat tanks. Most of these are M1A2 Abrams tanks, considered one of the most powerful MBTs in the world. The US also has a large number of reserve tanks ready for action. 4. North Korea – 4,344 Tanks North Korea has surprised the world with its fleet of 4,344 tanks, securing the fourth spot. In 2024, North Korea introduced a new MBT that closely resembles Western tank models, strengthening its ground forces. 5. India – 4,201 Tanks India is in the fifth spot with around 4,201 combat tanks. According to the website War Power India, its fleet includes the Ajeya Mk.2 (T-72 Ajeya), and Bhishma (T-90S (Bhishma)). These tanks boost India's ability to respond to threats from neighbouring countries and improve its defence capabilities. 6. Egypt – 3,620 Tanks Egypt comes sixth with 3,620 tanks, including 1,130 US-made M1A1 Abrams. This makes Egypt one of the leading nations in terms of tank strength in the Middle East and Africa. 7. Pakistan – 2,627 Tanks Pakistan ranks seventh with 2,627 tanks in its fleet. In 2024, the country launched an ambitious project through Heavy Industries Taxila (HIT) to develop an Active Protection System (APS) for its main battle tanks, aiming to modernise and enhance tank performance. 8. Türkiye – 2,238 Tanks Türkiye holds the eighth position with 2,238 tanks. The country uses a variety of tank models, including Leopard 1, Leopard 2, M60 Sabra, M60 Patton, and M48 Patton. Türkiye's defence industry has also been working on producing its own tank called Altay. 9. South Korea – 2,236 Tanks With a total of 2,236 tanks, South Korea ranks ninth. Its advanced K2 Black Panther is considered one of the most modern and technologically superior combat tanks in the world today. 10. Iran – 1,713 Tanks Iran rounds off the list with 1,713 combat tanks. It has developed home-grown models like the Karrar and Zulfiqar tanks. These domestic tanks show Iran's efforts to reduce reliance on foreign arms imports. As military strategies continue to evolve, so does the race to build better, stronger, and faster combat tanks. These tanks will remain a key part of any country's defence system for years to come. To stay updated on the stories that are going viral, follow Indiatimes Trending.
India.com
06-07-2025
- Business
- India.com
From Russia Ukraine war, Middle East conflicts, to Pakistan, China earning huge profits by..., other countries...
New Delhi: In the last few years, China has emerged as the biggest profiteer of war. When neighbouring countries fight, China becomes their dealer. From the Russia-Ukraine war to the India-Pakistan conflict, and civil wars from Yemen to Africa, Chinese weapons are visible on every front. What does SIPRI report say? A recent report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) has revealed that China has sent military equipment to more than 44 countries in the last few years. China has supplied various weapons ranging from fighter jets to 44 countries, of which the maximum weapons have been sold to Pakistan. The SIPRI report shows that 63 percent of China's military exports have gone to Pakistan, which includes fighter jets and missiles to air defense systems and drones. These systems were used in the conflict with India in May. However, the India-Pakistan conflict was not the only war in which Chinese weapons have been used. The report shows that China's strategy has become to engage countries in conflict and sell them weapons. That is why China is now supporting countries and elements that become the cause of regional instability, such as Pakistan, Russia or Iran and Iran-backed proxy organizations. How does China Pakistan military alliance work? The depth of the military alliance between China and Pakistan can be gauged from the fact that 63% of Chinese military exports go to Pakistan. These include fighter jets (JF-17 Thunder), missiles, drones, air defense systems and electronic warfare tools. Beijing got two benefits from this. On the one hand, its biggest defence customer (Pakistan) was satisfied, and on the other, a regional rival like India was indirectly challenged. Not only this, by not giving technological self-reliance to countries like Pakistan, China has deliberately trapped them in the trap of its military dependency. You must have heard that many Chinese weapons are made in Pakistan, but you will be surprised to know that all those weapons are made by Chinese engineers, people of Pakistan only work in such weapon factories out of compulsion and all the engineers and people engaged in technical work are Chinese. What is China's role in Russia-Ukraine war? China's role in Russia-Ukraine war is also quite dangerous. Although China has publicly denied sending weapons to the war, it is continuously supplying dual-use goods, such as machine tools, electronics, chemicals to Russia, which is helping Russia to maintain its military production. Apart from this, Chinese drones and other defense products are being used on the battlefield by the Russian army. The research report of the Takshila Institute shows that 90% of Russia's high priority military equipment is being purchased from China, which makes it clear that Beijing has used the Ukraine war as an opportunity. In a war where it cannot be a direct participant, China is taking advantage of it by playing its role indirectly. What is China's role in Middle East conflicts? When Hamas attacked Israel on 7 October 2023 and a terrible war started in the Middle East, China started supplying its weapons. Last year, US intelligence sources told i24 News that Yemen-based and Iran-backed Houthi rebels have bought Chinese weapons to attack ships. In return, they do not attack Chinese ships. The Houthis have not attacked China's ships in the Red Sea and the Strait of Hormuz. In this way, China is also making geo-political bargains by providing weapons.
Miami Herald
04-07-2025
- Business
- Miami Herald
What US Arms Export Review Means for Its Allies
The United States is reviewing the sending of military gear not just to Ukraine, but to countries across the world, the Pentagon has said, a fresh doubling down on the Trump administration's "America First" agenda, which appears to focus more on U.S. aid rather than lucrative arms deals. However, the move highlights the strain exerted even on the world's largest defense exporter, as demand for military hardware in key areas, such as air defense and artillery, far outstrips supply, analysts say. The U.S.'s vast military-industrial complex accounted for 43 percent of global arms exports between 2020 and 2024, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) said in March. But with the global uptick in demand for equipment, "there's too little to go around," said Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow at the Belgian think tank, Bruegel. The Pentagon review is a prudent stock-take, and one a long time coming for certain types of missiles and munitions, said Ed Arnold, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute think tank. Yet it does pile pressure on countries actively at war in receipt of U.S. supplies, and could prompt swathes of Europe, which have not yet established their own production lines to pump out enough defense gear, to sit up a little straighter. "We can't give weapons to everybody all around the world," the Department of Defense's chief spokesperson, Sean Parnell, said on Wednesday. "We have to look out for America and defending our homeland," he told reporters. Ukraine is the country most obviously impacted, and the Pentagon has not yet confirmed whether the U.S. has paused weapons shipments to other countries, according to The New York Times. Although Kyiv is no longer as reliant on the United States as it was during the early stages of the war with Russia, U.S. donations continue to be important. The U.S. has provided about $67 billion in military aid to Ukraine since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of its neighbor in February 2022, the State Department said in March. Officials on Tuesday confirmed that the U.S. was holding back deliveries of military supplies to Ukraine after reports indicated that an evaluation of American munitions stockpiles had raised concerns over shortages. Kyiv's Defense Ministry publicly said it had not been officially told by the U.S. that deliveries of military aid would be stopped, and had "requested a telephone conversation" with American officials. "We're always assessing our munitions and where we're sending them," Parnell said, adding that under the Biden administration, the U.S. was "giving away weapons and munitions without really thinking about how many we have." Parnell said that the Pentagon would not provide any updates on the quantity or types of military supplies to Ukraine, nor any timelines for delivery. The delayed weapons reportedly include rounds for 155 mm howitzers, more than 100 Hellfire missiles and precision-guided rounds known as GMLRS, as well as dozens of Patriot missiles. Air defense missiles, in particular the expensive interceptors for the vaunted U.S.-made Patriot systems, have always been at the top of Kyiv's wish list. Ukrainian officials and analysts told Newsweek on Wednesday they were above all concerned about supplies of Patriot missiles. While U.S. shelves are likely still brimming with equipment, the air defense missiles and artillery ammunition that have dominated aid packages will be running in shorter supply, said Pieter Wezeman, a senior researcher in SIPRI's arms transfers team. It is also a question of how full U.S. planners believe their shelves should be, Wezeman told Newsweek. There has always been an understanding that the U.S. is "thin" on Patriot supplies, former Pentagon official Jim Townsend told Newsweek on Wednesday. However, for Ukraine, there's "no alternative" against Russia's advanced ballistic missiles, Lesia Orobets, a former Ukrainian lawmaker deeply involved in Ukraine's air defense, told Newsweek. Observers say Ukraine must now turn to its own industry, further boosting its ability to produce equipment, as well as rely on European partners who have supported Kyiv for years. "Currently, Ukraine can compensate the lack of the U.S. supply by European sources," said Andrii Ziuz, a former chief executive of Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council and current head of technology at London-based company Prevail. Europe itself is at a major evaluation point. The Pentagon's wording is ambiguous, and the review is unlikely to target the foreign military sales that keep America's industry afloat, experts say. However, the U.S. feeling the bite of shortages would not be a good sign for the rest of NATO. Countries on the continent have been major customers of U.S. weapons and platforms for decades. Patriot, and more importantly, its interceptor missiles, are in high demand in Europe as well, Arnold said. "This is going to put a real constraints on European air defense requirements," Arnold told Newsweek. Senior Trump officials had pushed for European NATO members and Canada to dedicate 5 percent of their GDP to defense, a target that had seemed entirely unrealistic until the alliance pledged to meet this threshold in the coming years at NATO's summit last week. Separately, the European Commission, the European Union's executive arm, announced in early March that it would mobilize €800 billion, or roughly $900 billion, in defense funding for member states under a plan dubbed "ReArm Europe." It's a "nearly historical re-armament," said Kirkegaard. The U.S. has also been quite clear that it expects Europe and Canada to continue purchasing American weapons, while still investing in their own defense. This was greeted with somewhat mixed reactions from Europe, although there is a broad consensus that U.S. exports to the continent will dip as Europe builds up its own industries. "It's very clear that the U.S. exports will go down very significantly," Kirkegaard said. However, expanding industrial capacity in Europe is still in the early stages and may be unable to meet demand within the timeframe when key capabilities, such as air defense, could be needed. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said last week that the alliance will invest in a "five-fold increase" in air defense capabilities, as well as "thousands more tanks and armoured vehicles" and millions of artillery rounds. "Europe and Ukraine needs to double—or triple down—not only on domestic production in Ukraine, but very much on improving air defense capability across Europe and in a way that is not dependent on the United States," Kirkegaard said. Patriot missiles, among other types of American-made equipment, are also very much sought after in Israel, particularly after waves of Iranian ballistic missile strikes during what has been termed the "12 day war" last month. Israel also utilizes other systems, such as the American Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) batteries, to intercept ballistic missiles. The U.S. is far more involved in Israel's air defense compared to Ukraine. U.S. troops have repeatedly been involved in shooting down Iranian missiles heading for Israel, and the Trump administration has been far more staunchly supportive of Israel compared to Ukraine. "It's very clear that Israel is the top priority for critical U.S. military supplies of high-end air defense," said Kirkegaard. Israel also has a very strong domestic industry, a major exporter in its own right. Israel's Defense Ministry said last month that it had increased its defense exports for a fourth consecutive year in 2024, with significant jumps in sales to Europe. There was "significant growth" in contracts signed off with European nations, which accounted for 54 percent of the deals closed last year, Israel said in early June. This figure stood at 35 percent in 2023, according to the Israeli government. Missiles, rockets and air defense systems accounted for almost half of all deals, a surge from 36 percent in the previous year, the defense ministry said. Yet Israel, too, needs to build up its stocks of ballistic missile interceptors, Kirkegaard said. "Everyone needs to produce more of these things because of the scale of the ballistic threats," he said. While Iran and Russia have fired high numbers of ballistic missiles at Israel and Ukraine, North Korea has sent its own ballistic missiles for battlefield use and testing by Russian forces. Pyongyang's missiles have since become far more accurate, according to Ukrainian intelligence. Related Articles Trump Administration Sending Hundreds of Marines to Florida to Help ICEUkraine Braces for Impact of U.S. Weapons PauseDan Caine Reveals Iran Strike Pilot's Words on Seeing ExplosionDefense Department Worker Charged with Stealing Top-Secret Documents 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
