world military spending & third world debt

These stats published in todays Sydney Morning Herald about military spending in 2004 were taken from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, a prominent European think tank.

• The world spent $US1.035 trillion on defence during the year, corresponding to 2.6 per cent of global gross domestic product.

• The United States accounted for 47 per cent of all military expenditure, while Britain and France each made up five per cent of the total.

• In all, 15 countries accounted for 82 per cent of the world's total military spending.

• The arms trade also grew sharply, with the top 100 makers of weapons increasing their combined sales by 25 per cent between 2002 and 2003, the report said. Those companies sold weapons and arms worth $US236 billion worldwide in 2003, compared to $US188 billion a year earlier.

• The United States accounted for 63 per cent of all arms sales in 2003.

However, the figures may be on the low end, the institute said, as countries are increasingly outsourcing services related to armed conflict, like military training and providing logistics in combat zones, without classifying them as military expenses.

---

I am so offended by these figures I can't see straight. Offended because these same countries who justify justify justify spending trillions on controlling the planet so she and all her resources can serve THEM the best. Offended because most of the people on this planet belong to third world countries who are trapped in poverty cycles which are almost impossible to escape because of third world debt.

Total long-term debt of the 137 developing countries reporting to the World Bank is up to $2.5 TRILLION to date. The money is owed to commercial banks and other private lenders, directly to the governments of First World countries, and to international financial institutions such as the World Bank and IMF - what is known as multilateral debt.

These debts have literally trapped billions of people around the world.

Alleviating this crisis would free 80% of the world's population from the institutionalised process of economic degradation that occurs in most of the nations of the planet struggling to deal with paying the interest (not even the capital) of these massive international loans. The IMF has a LOT to answer for!! But if everyone stopped this mad military spending for just one day, it could completely eradicate the DEBT CRISIS of even a few of the poorest coutnries who need to be able to stand.

There is only one war in all of this - an economic one. The first world countries that propogate War also benefit from the massive economics of war and those same countries also happen to be the ones who refuse to release their dirt-poor third world debtors from the shackles of poverty.

Many developing countries spend more on debt payments than on education and health combined. Those same countries who spend so lavishly on war cannot afford to cure thrid world debt - it would mean economic emancipation for the majority of poor people on the planet and this could seriously threaten the economic world domiance the top 8 economies enjoy so much.

Dozens of nations trapped in the Third World debt cycle, in hock to foreign banks, governments and multilateral bodies such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF). These countries cannot declare bankruptcy, wipe the slate clean and start again. They have to pay these "preferred creditors" in full and on time.

In the 42 most 'Heavily Indebted Poor Countries' as defined by the World Bank Group, 600 million people struggle to survive on less than a dollar a day. Yet these same countries send the world's rich countries $64 million every day to cover the interest and capital payments on their total $213 billion debt.

How did this massive debt come about? In short, billions of dollars - much of it money from oil earnings in the Middle East recycled through Western banks - were lent to Third World nations decades ago to help them 'develop'. Tragically, relatively little of this borrowed money went to uplift people from long-term poverty. Too much was spent on military arms, wasted on disastrous mega-projects, squandered by corrupt dictators or siphoned off to rich elites.

High interest rates in the 1970s and 80s made matters worse, and low commodity prices for traditional Third World exports such as coffee, sugar and tin left poor countries broke, without the foreign exchange necessary to pay their debts.

Money that should have been earmarked for projects to reduce poverty was sent back to developed nations to service old debt principle and interest. Unable to fully pay off or default on previous loans, developing countries had to, and still do, take out new loans to keep afloat.

And so the debt spiral deepens.

As a condition of new loans from bodies such as the IMF, governments usually have to implement harsh free market measures known as 'structural adjustment policies' (SAPs). SAPs generally call for deep cuts to social programs and government services, the selling off of state enterprises and the promotion of raw resource exports over local food production.

On paper, the plan is to help get economies back 'on course' and trim bloated and inefficient bureaucracies. But in reality, the controversial policies often result in deepening poverty and social unrest.

And in the push to generate fast cash to pay off the debts, the environment is pushed beyond sustainable limits. Deforestation and desertification are all too common sights in much of the Third World.

Some would argue that the money simply has to be paid back. If you borrow it, you are on the hook for it, end of story. But Third World countries would not be getting a "free ride" if their debts were cancelled. They've been repaid many times over.

The never-ending hole that first world countries think they throw their foreign aid money into actually flows upwards, and back to them.

Between 1981 and 1997 the less developed countries paid over $2.9 trillion in interest and principal payments. That's about $1.5 trillion more than what they received in new loans.

For every US dollar of 'official development assistance' Third World countries received in 1999, they paid out almost six dollars in debt payments.

I support an organisation called "Jubilee +" which is now pushing for the outright cancellation of developing countries' illegitimate debts, without adherence to strict Structural Adjustment Programs. This includes:

• Immediate 100 percent cancellation of the debts owned by low-income countries on the grounds that they are illegitimate, since repayment violates the human rights of countries' citizens.

• Assessing the debts of all developing nations, leading to cancellation of those incurred illegitimately. (What is an illegitimate debt? $13 billion is owed by the Democratic Republic of Congo (formerly Zaire), even though much of it was lent to former dictator Mobutu.)

I won't go into all the possible scenarios ... theres already too much written here - I just wanted to highlight this major HYPOCRISY that I can barely stomach. There are ways out of the debt spiral, and none of them are easy ... but thats for another blog.

please note : all figures US dollars.