An uncontrolled and uncontrolled arms race

The world is galloping in an unbridled arms race. The new data published by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute are eloquent, with a 6.8% jump in global military spending, growth in all regions of the planet and the level per capita highest since 1990. Everything suggests that this dynamic will continue in the coming years. The data are obviously a reflection of the enormous tension caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine, but also the worrying pulse between the United States and China and the instability of the Middle East.

A highly negative factor of the current arms race is the almost total absence of arms control treaties that limit and control it. The security architecture that had been built between the two great military powers of recent decades—the United States and the USSR/Russia—has been falling apart. One after another, the pillars have collapsed: the anti-ballistic missile treaty, the one on intermediate-range nuclear forces, the one on conventional armed forces in Europe or the open skies treaty, which allows certain aerial surveillance measures. In one way or another, with different arguments, Washington and Moscow have let these agreements fall. The New START, also on nuclear weapons, is badly wounded. The multilateral Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is still standing, but shows clear signs of ineffectiveness.

In parallel, nothing new has emerged in relation to the new second great power, China, which spent about $300 billion on defense in 2023, a third of that of the United States. But that figure represents an increase of 60% in a decade, compared to to 10% of Washington. NATO still accounts for more than half of global military spending.

The margin for dialogue between Washington and Moscow is practically zero after the invasion of Ukraine. Beijing, for its part, considers that it still has a long way to go to bring its arsenals to the level of the two historical powers. She is not willing to assume any ties in the meantime. All three invest heavily, among other things, in the nuclear segment. The first two in a modernization effort. The third, expanding an arsenal that is even smaller.

This situation is undesirable. Arms control treaties provide valuable elements of control and transparency, imposing rules, limits, communication and surveillance mechanisms. All of this is crucial to reduce reckless drifts or unintentional risks. Precisely for this reason, the USSR and the USA were building them in the stage known as Stop, between the late sixties and early seventies. After the Korean War in the 1950s and the terrible scare of the 1962 missile crisis, the conditions for this dialogue began to mature. Both powers supported enormous expenditure to finance the race. The US suffered in Vietnam, the USSR had to accept the distance from China. They began to talk, and little by little several treaties emerged, such as the one on anti-ballistic missiles or that on conventional forces, which put the Cold War on a more predictable path.

Instability and unpredictability are two key features of this era. It is already like that. And Donald Trump has a real chance of winning the US presidential election next November.

Follow all the international information onFacebook andxor inour weekly newsletter.

_