Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_1811528518-scaled

Global military spending tops $2 trillion for the first time

The US far outpaces all spenders when pressing threats like climate change and nuclear conflict that require diplomatic strategies receive little funding.

Reporting | Military Industrial Complex
google cta
google cta

According to a new analysis from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, global military spending topped $2.1 trillion in 2021, the first time it has surpassed the $2 trillion mark. Over 38 percent of that total — $801 billion — was accounted for by the United States. Figures for 2022 will rise even higher on the strength of substantial spending increases in the United States and Europe in response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and due to the misguided notion that China represents a “pacing threat” that calls for sharp increases in Pentagon outlays.

It’s hard to overstate just how much the United States and its allies dominate world military spending figures. As of 2021, the United States alone was spending over two and one-half times on its military than what China spent, and over 12 times what Russia spent. Just four U.S. NATO allies — the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Italy — together spend over three times what Russia spends on its military. And adding Australia, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan’s spending to the U.S. total puts the United States and its closest regional allies together at well over three times what China spends.

But of course, throwing money at the Pentagon doesn’t necessarily make anyone safer. Much of the funding steered to the Department of Defense is wasted on a misguided strategy and dysfunctional or unnecessary weapons programs like the F-35 combat aircraft and the new intercontinental ballistic missile, now officially known as the Sentinel. And despite pledges to “put diplomacy first” in U.S. foreign policy, when it comes to budget allocations the Biden administration’s approach is clearly “put the Pentagon first.”

And the threats being cited to justify near record levels of spending for the Department of Defense are the same ones the Trump administration cited in its National Defense Strategy: China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and what used to be called the “Global War on Terror.” Aside from the administration’s on-again, off-again effort to revive the Iran nuclear deal, the above-mentioned threats are too often addressed through military means and military preparations rather than by a comprehensive diplomatic strategy. Meanwhile, climate change, the greatest existential threat to the planet alongside the risk of a nuclear conflict, has taken a back seat in funding and policy development while military spending runs out of control.

Meanwhile, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine clearly calls for a response, but it’s not clear why it can or should jack up the Pentagon budget for years to come, especially given pledges by Germany and other U.S. European allies to do more in their own defense.

So, for what it’s worth, America is #1 in global military spending, but we need a thorough overhaul of our approaches to strategy and weapons procurement. Pouring more money into the same broken system is a recipe for failure.


Image: studiostoks via shutterstock.com
google cta
Reporting | Military Industrial Complex
nuclear weapons testing
A mushroom cloud expands over the Bikini Atoll during a U.S. nuclear weapons test in 1946. (Shutterstock/ Everett Collection)

Nuke treaty loss a 'colossal' failure that could lead to nuclear arms race

Global Crises

On February 13th, 2025, President Trump said something few expected to hear. He said, “There's no reason for us to be building brand-new nuclear weapons. We already have so many. . . You could destroy the world 50 times over, 100 times over. And here we are building new nuclear weapons . . . We’re all spending a lot of money that we could be spending on other things that are actually, hopefully, much more productive.”

I could not agree more with that statement. But with today’s expiration of the New START Treaty, we face the very real possibility of a new nuclear arms race — something that, to my knowledge, neither the President, Vice President, nor any other senior U.S. official has meaningfully discussed.

keep readingShow less
Witkoff Kushner Trump
Top image credit: U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff looks on during a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, at Trump's Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, U.S., December 29, 2025. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

As US-Iran talks resume, will Israel play spoiler (again)?

Middle East

This Friday, the latest chapter in the long, fraught history of U.S.-Iran negotiations will take place in Oman. Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Araghchi and President Trump’s Special Envoy Steve Witkoff will meet in an effort to stave off a war between the U.S. and Iran.

The negotiations were originally planned as a multilateral forum in Istanbul, with an array of regional Arab and Muslim countries present, apart from the U.S. and Iran — Turkey, Qatar, Oman, and Saudi Arabia.

keep readingShow less
Trump Putin
Top image credit: Miss.Cabal/shutterstock.com

Last treaty curbing US, Russia nuclear weapons has collapsed

Global Crises

The end of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), the last treaty between the U.S. and Russia placing limits on their respective nuclear arsenals, may not make an arms race inevitable. There is still potential for pragmatic diplomacy.

Both sides can adhere to the basic limits even as they modernize their arsenals. They can bring back some of the risk-reduction measures that stabilized their relationship for years. And they can reengage diplomatically with each other to craft new agreements. The alternative — unconstrained nuclear competition — is dangerous, expensive, and deeply unpopular with most Americans.

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.