Suchergebnisse

Following the return to democracy in Argentina, the definition of new roles and missions for the armed forces became imperative in order to establish civilian authority over the military and contribute to the consolidation of the democratic regime. After seven years of military dictatorship (1976–1983), the transformation of repressive and war-prone armed forces into law-abiding and peaceful ones was needed to achieve three key political goals: To strengthen the newly restored yet weak rule of law, to rebuild the country's battered international image, and to help professionalise an ill-reputed military. This article argues that since the return to democracy in 1983, successive governments have pursued these goals by linking issues traditionally falling within the military and security realm to the country's external agenda. Building upon the defence diplomacy literature – that is, the use of defence and military cooperation as a diplomatic tool – the article develops a conceptual framework to apply to the Argentine case, focussing on how defence diplomacy is developed in three stages which we conceptualise as inward-looking, outward-looking, and symmetrical military-to-military relations. Overall, we contend that defence diplomacy – though still a recent and weakly systematised concept in the field – is a useful tool which should be taken into account when analysing the democratic transitions and the pursued civilian control over the armed forces in Global South countries like Argentina.

Total global military expenditure in 2009 is estimated to have been $1531 billion. This represents an increase of 6 per cent in real terms compared to 2008, and of 49 per cent since 2000. Military expenditure comprised approximately 2.7 per cent of global gross domestic product (GDP) in 2009. All regions and subregions saw an increase in 2009, except the Middle East. The global economic crisis had little impact on world military spending in 2009, as most major economies boosted public spending to counteract the recession, postponing deficit reduction. While military expenditure was not a major feature of economic stimulus packages, it was not generally cut either. Nine of the top 10 spenders increased military spending in 2009. However, some smaller economies less able to sustain large deficits did cut spending. Natural resource revenues appear to be a significant driver of military expenditure in many developing countries, with rapidly rising revenues from oil and other commodities in recent years, due to increases in both price and production. This may lead to increased military spending as a means of protecting resources from internal or external threats, while resource revenues are often a source of funding for arms purchases. The drop in commodity prices in 2009 has slowed this trend in some cases. The conflict in Afghanistan is proving increasingly costly to many of the countries with a substantial troop presence there and has also generated debates as to the focus of military spending, between equipment of use in current conflicts and major weapon platforms designed for power projection. In the UK a combination of the Afghanistan conflict, high deficits and an overambitious equipment programme have sharpened this debate. US military spending is continuing to rise under the Obama Administration, partly due to the escalating conflict in Afghanistan. Spending is budgeted to rise further in 2010, and military spending is exempted from a general freeze on discretionary spending. The 2010 budget saw some refocusing of priorities, with cancellation of some major weapon systems and increased focus on information and communications technology, but no major strategic shift. Military spending patterns in Afghanistan and Iraq both reflect the demands of rebuilding a country's armed forces from scratch following external invasion and with continued requirement for substantial external funding. Adapted from the source document.

Enthält: Perlo-Freeman, Sam; Ismail, Olawale; Solmirano, Carina: Military expenditure. - S. [177]-200 Perlo-Freeman, Sam ...: Military expenditure data, 2000-2009. - S. [201]-242 Kelly, Noel: The reporting of military expenditure data. - S. [243]-249

In 2012 confidence- and security-building measures (CSBMs) -- that is, openness and restraint to provide reassurance that military capabilities will not be used for political gain -- made a valuable contribution to reducing tensions and preventing the escalation of incidents in several regions of the world. As well as helping to prevent specific incidents from escalating into something worse, CSBMs are being developed more broadly in several regions as a positive tool to enhance cooperative relations among states based on partnership, mutual reassurance and transparency. While CSBMs cannot shoulder the burden of promoting cooperative security alone, in several regions they make a useful contribution to promoting and fostering stability and creating the conditions for positive growth and development. As regards arms control -- binding commitments to self-restraint in the structure, equipment or operations of armed forces -- the situation in 2012 was less encouraging. Adapted from the source document.

While the United States has led the global rise in military spending over the past decade, this trend has been followed by many emerging (or re-emerging) regional powers such as China, Brazil, India, Russia, South Africa and Turkey. These countries all have rapidly growing economies and key economic and political roles in their respective regions and, in some cases, globally. All six are also developing as military powers, engaging in significant military modernization programmes. Apart from Turkey, all have been increasing military spending, often very rapidly. The motives for these countries' military modernization and accompanying increases in military spending vary. In all cases, economic growth is a key enabler; in no case has military spending grown faster than gross domestic product (GDP) since 2001. Economic growth can also be a direct driver, as troops' salaries share in general increases in salaries. In some of these six cases, current conflict is a driver of military spending. For India, the perennial conflict with Pakistan and in Kashmir has been joined by the growing Naxalite rebellion. In Turkey, in contrast, the reduction in the intensity of the conflict with the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) is a factor behind falling military spending. Regional disputes and rivalries also create a desire not to lag behind other countries, even where relations are currently peaceful. For China, the overwhelming US military dominance in the region is a concern, especially in relation to potential conflict over Taiwan. In turn, India is concerned by China's growing military might, given the two countries' border disputes and rivalry for influence in the Indian Ocean. Russia meanwhile views an expanding NATO as a potential, if not a current, threat. Even in the absence of regional rivalries, a perception of military power as a source of status may be a motivating factor, as in the cases of Brazil, South Africa and, increasingly, Turkey. High military spending can be controversial in the face of more pressing social needs. In Brazil, this tension has recently led to changes in budget priorities regarding military spending. In South Africa, the recent major arms procurement package has been severely criticized for diverting funds from poverty and development goals, as well as for corruption. In India, however, civil society criticism of military spending is countered by strong popular concern over Pakistan. Adapted from the source document.

World military expenditure did not increase in 2011, for the first time since 1998. The world total for 2011 is estimated to have been $1738 billion, representing 2.5 per cent of global gross domestic product or $249 for each person. Compared with the total in 2010, military spending remained virtually unchanged in real terms. However, it is still too early to say whether this means that world military expenditure has finally peaked. The main cause of the halt in military spending growth was the economic policies adopted in most Western countries in the aftermath of the global financial and economic crisis that started in 2008. These policies prioritized the swift reduction of budget deficits that increased sharply following the crisis. Adapted from the source document.

World military expenditure in 2012 is estimated to have been $1756 billion, representing 2.5 per cent of global gross domestic product (GDP) or $249 for each person in the world. The total is about 0.4 per cent lower in real terms than in 2011, the first fall since 1998. Nonetheless, the total is higher than in any year between the end of World War II and 2010. The distribution of global spending in 2012 shows what may be the beginnings of a shift from the West to other parts of the world, in particular Eastern Europe and the developing world. In Western and Central Europe, austerity measures continued to reduce military spending. In Asia and Oceania, while military spending still increased in 2012, it did so at a slower pace, partly as a result of weaker economic growth in the wake of the 2008 global financial crisis. In Central and South Asia, North America, Oceania, and Western and Central Europe, increases in the period 2003-2009 were followed by decreases in 2009-12; in sub-Saharan Africa, East Asia, and Latin America, there was a major slowdown in the growth rate, with smaller slowdowns in Eastern Europe and South East Asia. In contrast, the rate of growth accelerated in the Middle East and North Africa. The overall effect on the world total was a lowering in growth in 2010-11, now followed by the fall in 2012. Adapted from the source document.