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
Dan Caine
Top photo credit: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine conduct a press briefing on Operation Epic Fury at the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., March 4, 2026. (DoW photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza)

Did Caine just announce the Morgenthau option for Iran?

QiOSK

Gen. Dan Caine’s formulation of American war aims in Iran is remarkable not because it is bellicose, but because it is strategically incoherent.

In a press conference Tuesday morning, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not describe a limited campaign to suppress missile fire, blunt Iran’s naval threat, or even impose a severe but bounded setback on Tehran’s coercive instruments. He described a campaign against Iran’s “military and industrial base” designed to prevent the regime from attacking Americans, U.S. interests, and regional partners “for years to come.” In an earlier briefing he put the objective similarly: to prevent Iran from projecting power outside its borders. Rather than the language of a discrete coercive operation, this describes a war against a state’s capacity to regenerate power.

keep readingShow less
Ilham Aliyev azerbaijan iran
Top photo credit: Azerbaijan president Ilham Aliyev visited Embassy of Islamic Republic of Iran, offered condolences over death of former President Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, in 2017. (Office of the President of Azerbaijan/public domain)

Neocons wanted an Azeri uprising against Iran. They didn't get it.

Middle East

With Iran resisting the U.S./Israeli onslaught for the second week, what was supposed to be a quick transition to a pro-U.S. regime following the decapitation strike that killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is fast turning into a quagmire. While the U.S. and Israel continue to sow mayhem on Tehran from the skies, the previously unthinkable option of sending ground troops to Iran is gaining ground.

First, an apparent plan was being hatched to employ Kurdish fighters to take on Tehran. Then, when drones, allegedly flying from Iran although Tehran denied it, struck the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic of Azerbaijan — hitting an airport terminal and a village school, and wounding four civilians — the stage appeared set for the opening of a northern front against Iran. Here was an alleged act of aggression from Iranian territory against Israel's closest partner in the South Caucasus. It offered the pretext to goad Azerbaijan into joining the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran.

keep readingShow less
Trump miami press conference iran
Top photo credit: Trump press conference on Iran, Miami, 3/9/26 (PBS screengrab)

Trump press conference reveals a man who wants out of war

QiOSK

Trump’s “all over the place” press conference at his Miami resort on Monday appears to have had two key objectives: a) Calm the markets by signalling the conflict may soon be over because it has been so "successful,” and b) Prepare the ground for Trump ending the war through a unilateral declaration of victory.

Though ending a war that never should have been started in the first place — rather than fighting it endlessly in the pursuit of an illusory victory as the U.S. did in Afghanistan — is the right move, it won’t be as easy as Trump appears to think.

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.