|
Military Expenditures As A Percentage of GDP: A 100% Indefensible and Stupid Idea
- that everybody seems to love
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
Politicians, scholars and the media unthinkingly promote this nonsense, latest President Trump at Davos. Western rational thinking is out; market thinking, hysteria, and emotionalism are in.
With intellectual and moral disarmament, the West has become its own worst enemy. It is dangerous. It’s self-destructive.
•
Jan Oberg
•
For years, NATO's capacity goal has been for all its members to spend 2% of their GDP on the military. To many, this would be a ceiling, but according to ex-SG Jens Stoltenberg, from the Madrid Summit in 2022 onwards, it was the floor.
This goal is a splendid indicator of the frighteningly low intellectual level on which the alliance and the Western world, in general, operate today - intellectual and moral disarmament coupled with militarist re-armament.
Why?
A defence budget shall be determined by a serious, multi-dimensional and future-oriented analysis based on a series of more or less likely scenarios: What are we challenged by the next x number of years?
Next follows a matching of probability and capacity: Threats that are too big for a country’s capacity to do something about – like being hit by nuclear weapons – or threats that are too unlikely are separated and dropped. So are threats/challenges that are too small to worry about.
Then the threat analysis is left with credible, probable future threats within a resource spectrum that the country in question can do something about. It’s based on such a detailed analysis that a government presents its threat analysis and seeks to allocate, or re-allocate, its resources to achieve optimal security given its resources.
This is the way it was done up until the end of the First Cold War. One could agree or disagree with various governments’ threat analyses and priorities, but they were published in studies of hundreds of pages, were put out for public debate and then - as long as the West practised democracy - decisions were made.
But what are NATO countries doing today?
They drop all this – intellectually demanding – analytical work based on numerous types of civilian and military expertise and simply set off X% of their GDP no matter what kinds of threats there are in the real world.
Mindbogglingly, they tie their military expenditures to their economic performance: If GDP increases, then military spending grows proportionately! If the GDP slides down, defence expenditures will do so, too, regardless of the perceived or actual threat environment.
NATO’s original Military Expenditures As Percentage of GDP idea is a reflection of the Western delusional idea applied in many other fields that, when there is a problem, we set off funds to solve it and pump those funds into a system, whether or not that system is functioning, functioning optimally – or not at all.
In other words, money has become the measure of problem-solving capacity and quality; changes, reforms or completely new thinking and structural reform don’t even enter the equation.
Qualities are expressed in quantitative terms. And it is the end of thinking and common sense.
The 2% goal was meaningless from Day One- Intellectual dwarfs bought it and used it again and again over the last decade or so.
Threats to a country do not move up and down according to that country’s economy. Such thinking points to the intellectual inside-the-box stagnation of an old organisation.
President Trump has just increased it to 5%. When will it be 10% in this incredibly unproductive and parasitic sector that I call the Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex, MIMAC ? It is the cancer that eats up civilian creativity, innovation and socio-economic development and militarises us to death - while the rest of the world is whizzing along and surpassing the West.
Be sure that the higher the percentage figure gets, the faster NATO countries’ civilian economy will sink into an even deeper crisis - because the economist’s First Law is that you cannot eat the cake and have it too.
The fact that no one - except this author - has addressed this Military Expenditures As % of GDP as intellectual BS - is, in and of itself, a threat to world security. Where rational, intelligent thinking goes out, militarism and war seep in.
With Trump in the White House, the decline of the West will go even faster. That’s why he wants a Greater America from Panama to the largest possible part of Scandinavia (with 47 US bases) and the Arctic.
There may come a day when Europe sees fit to open up to Russia, China, and all the other ‘bad’ guys - if they want to have anything to do with Europe. I mean, with friends like Trump and his greater America - perhaps out of NATO and 5% of economic wealth wasted completely - who will need to point to old enemies in the future?