Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_1746869927-scaled

How to reverse the US’s shockingly low Global Peace Index ranking

America must reorient a significant portion of its federal budget away from defense spending and towards public health and social services to build greater internal peace and resilience.

Analysis | Washington Politics
google cta
google cta

In recent weeks, peaceful demonstrators across America have been confronted by National Guard troops in the nation’s capital and by militarized police in cities, armed with tear gas and rubber bullets. Meanwhile, heavily armed militias have taken it upon themselves to counter-protest, calling to mind the rifle-toting protestors that stormed the Michigan Capitol in May to demand an end to the state’s stay-at-home order.

It doesn’t come as a surprise, then, that a recent report by the Institute for Economics and Peace validates that America is a dangerous place. Peace was deteriorating pre-COVID, and the current health, racial, and economic crises compounded have put the country at greater risk of continued internal violence.

The 2020 Global Peace Index is now in its fourteenth year of ranking 163 states and territories according to their level of peacefulness. It defines peace “in terms of the harmony achieved by the absence of violence or the fear of violence… described as Negative Peace.” Its complement is Positive Peace, which are the “attitudes, institutions and structures that create and sustain peaceful societies.”

The GPI measures peace in three domains: Societal Safety and Security, Ongoing Domestic and International Conflict, and Militarization. Some findings for this year are unsurprising: Iceland is ranked first in peacefulness, a position it has held since 2008, while Afghanistan is ranked the least peaceful country in the world for the second year in a row.

What may be controversial to some is the ranking of the world’s largest economy. The United States is ranked 121st in peacefulness out of 163 countries for the second year in a row, coming in lower than China, Bolivia, Chile, and France, which have experienced violent protests in the last year, and El Salvador, which has the highest number of homicides per 100,000 inhabitants. Our culturally similar neighbor to the north, Canada, is ranked the 6th most peaceful country in the world.

The United States’ ranking isn’t so remarkable considering that military spending accounts for 15 percent of all U.S. federal spending and more than half of the discretionary budget. Only North Korea, Russia, and Israel are higher on the GPI’s “militarization” ranking. The report uses seven indicators to measure the degree of militarization of a society, including military expenditure as a percentage of GDP and the volume of arms exports and imports per 100,000 people. Though the militarization domain did improve globally in the last year due to reductions in military expenditure, the U.S., Russia, Germany, France, and China still account for 75 percent of total weapons exports, while the U.S. alone accounts for 32 percent.

This spending has fueled America’s endless wars and the arming of foreign governments in brutal conflicts in the Middle East. This includes the $3.3 billion in military financing to Israel as it continues to launch attacks on the Gaza Strip and eagerly plans its annexation of the West Bank, and the over $100 billion in military sales to Saudi Arabia as it leads coalition airstrikes in Yemen which have led to catastrophic civilian death tolls.

Afghanistan, after trillions in spending and two decades of American military presence — the longest war in U.S. history — has the highest total number of deaths from internal conflict in the world.

In addition to covering internal violence and militarization, this year’s report includes a crucial new section: an analysis of the effect of COVID-19 on peace in societies. This section uses eight Positive Peace pillars that describe the institutions and structures of a society, including “well-functioning government,” “sound business environment,” and “low levels of corruption” to assess how well a country has dealt with the pandemic. The GPI notes that “countries with strong Positive Peace have higher resilience to absorb, adapt, and recover from shocks, such as COVID-19 and the ensuing recession.”

The United States’ weakness in the “well-functioning government” and “high levels of human capital” pillars explain why such a small proportion of the population was tested during the initial weeks of the outbreak. As of April 10, 2020, with fewer than 10,000 tests per million residents, the U.S. had tested fewer people than other developed countries, including Canada, Australia, and Norway. Lithuania, Italy, and Latvia had also tested more than the U.S. The capabilities described by “well-functioning government” enable authorities to quickly implement lockdown measures to flatten the epidemiological curve, and “high levels of human capital” allow a society to withstand the stress on its health system.

The report’s other pillars are also helpful in explaining the U.S.’s poor handling of the pandemic, and their underdevelopment points to signs of even further deterioration of American peace in the future. A combination of lockdown measures and insufficient rescue funds for small businesses weaken the U.S. “sound business environment” pillar. A severe lack of testing and personal protective equipment across the country, and especially among low-income and black and Hispanic neighborhoods where the virus already has a disproportionate impact, expose a broken healthcare system and America’s poor performance in the “equitable distribution of resources” pillar.

For years funds have been insufficiently allocated to healthcare, housing, education, and other essential services to prioritize national security and defense, which has ultimately eroded the public’s trust in American leadership. The weakening of each of these pillars helps illustrate how we arrived at the current moment of a frustrated society and anti-racist protests taking place in cities across all 50 states. Overwhelmed American hospitals, weeks of civil unrest, and a contracting economy have exposed how fragile the systems that uphold the United States truly are.

Those who favor militaristic policies often characterize their position as seeking “peace through strength.” Yet the GPI report and the failed response to COVID-19 expose the faulty logic behind this. Peace and security at home cannot be achieved merely by projecting military power abroad — and in fact, the U.S. insistence on global military domination has actively undermined both domestic and international peace.

The consequences of America’s long-standing bipartisan tradition of supporting increases to the Pentagon budget while ignoring other crucial departments and government functions, compounded by the Trump administration’s cuts towards health and environment agencies, have now been made apparent with the current administration’s disastrous handling of the COVID-19 crisis.

If we are to avoid the repetition of this catastrophe in the future, America must reorient a significant portion of its federal budget away from defense spending and towards public health and social services to build greater internal peace and resilience. American leaders must rethink national security to center around the well-being of its people rather than the pursuit of military dominance abroad.

The true long-term consequences of COVID-19 on peace in American society are still unknown. However, if the U.S. cannot improve its handling of the virus and rapidly reassess its governing priorities, it is likely that the United States’ ranking as the 121st most peaceful country in the world will sink even further in future GPI reports.


bgrocker / Shutterstock.com
google cta
Analysis | Washington Politics
Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi
Top photo credit: Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi 首相官邸 (Cabinet Public Affairs Office)

Takaichi 101: How to torpedo relations with China in a month

Asia-Pacific

On November 7, Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi stated that a Chinese attack on Taiwan could undoubtedly be “a situation that threatens Japan’s survival,” thereby implying that Tokyo could respond by dispatching Self-Defense Forces.

This statement triggered the worst crisis in Sino-Japanese relations in over a decade because it reflected a transformation in Japan’s security policy discourse, defense posture, and U.S.-Japan defense cooperation in recent years. Understanding this transformation requires dissecting the context as well as content of Takaichi’s parliamentary remarks.

keep readingShow less
Starmer, Macron, Merz G7
Top photo credit: Prime Minister Keir Starmer meets Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and António Costa, President of the European Council at the G7 world leaders summit in Kananaskis, June 15, 2025. Picture by Simon Dawson / No 10 Downing Street

The Europeans pushing the NATO poison pill

Europe

The recent flurry of diplomatic activity surrounding Ukraine has revealed a stark transatlantic divide. While high level American and Ukrainian officials have been negotiating the U.S. peace plan in Geneva, European powers have been scrambling to influence a process from which they risk being sidelined.

While Europe has to be eventually involved in a settlement of the biggest war on its territory after World War II, so far it’s been acting more like a spoiler than a constructive player.

keep readingShow less
Sudan
Top image credit: A Sudanese army soldier stands next to a destroyed combat vehicle as Sudan's army retakes ground and some displaced residents return to ravaged capital in the state of Khartoum Sudan March 26, 2025. REUTERS/El Tayeb Siddig
Will Sudan attack the UAE?

Saudi leans in hard to get UAE out of Sudan civil war

Middle East

As Saudi Arabia’s powerful crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), swept through Washington last week, the agenda was predictably packed with deals: a trillion-dollar investment pledge, access to advanced F-35 fighter jets, and coveted American AI technology dominated the headlines. Yet tucked within these transactions was a significant development for the civil war in Sudan.

Speaking at the U.S.-Saudi Investment Forum President Donald Trump said that Sudan “was not on my charts,” viewing the conflict as “just something that was crazy and out of control” until the Saudi leader pressed the issue. “His majesty would like me to do something very powerful having to do with Sudan,” Trump recounted, adding that MBS framed it as an opportunity for greatness.

The crown prince’s intervention highlights a crucial new reality that the path to peace, or continued war, in Sudan now runs even more directly through the escalating rivalry between Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The fate of Sudan is being forged in the Gulf, and its future will be decided by which side has more sway in Trump’s White House.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.