Knoema.com - Military http://knoema.fr 2021-08-04T11:18:00Z /favicon.png Knoema est votre Route du savoir personnelle US Military Spending is Higher, and Growing Faster, than Other Countries //knoema.fr/qcmloo/us-military-spending-is-higher-and-growing-faster-than-other-countries 2021-08-04T11:18:00Z Misha Gusev knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1000560
US Military Spending is Higher, and Growing Faster, than Other Countries

(19 May 2021) The defense industry is one of the few that have not taken a hit in the economic aftermath of COVID-19. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, in 2020 most countries increased their military spending from the previous year or kept it unchanged. Only 36 out of 148 countries analyzed by the Institute have cut military spending by more than 5% year-over-year.In 2020, world military expenditure increased to $2 trillion, which is equivalent to 2.3% of global GDP. 2020 is the second consecutive year in which the share of military expenditure in global GDP has increased. Between 2009 and 2018, the share of military expenditure in global GDP had declined from 2.6% to 2.1%.The US leads the world in overall military spending, with annual expenditures more than twice the defense budget of the next largest military spender, China. In 2019 and 2020, US military expenditures also grew faster than those in any of the next ten highest military spenders, which include China, India, and Russia. US defense spending now exceeds the aggregate military expenditure of the next ten countries put together.Analysis of data for 1992-2020 shows a correlation between the ratio of US military expenditure to other major countries and the world military expenditure grows. The growth in world spending reflects not only the increase in US military expenditure, but also the acceleration of military expenditure in countries seeking to preserve military parity.

Misha Gusev knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1000560
A Decade of Deteriorating Global Peace //knoema.fr/womqiu/a-decade-of-deteriorating-global-peace 2021-07-02T13:41:18Z Misha Gusev knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1000560
A Decade of Deteriorating Global Peace

(30 June 2021) While it’s true that major powers aren’t engaging in the kind of devastating large-scale wars that rocked the first half of the 20th century,  data from the Institute for Economics and Peace shows that the state of global peace is deteriorating. According to the Institute's 2021 Global Peace Index report, between 2012 and 2021 the peace index score deteriorated in 87 countries (out of 158 for which 2012-2021 data is available), including the three major military powers: the US, Russia, and China. Ongoing militarization is the main factor in the major military powers' worsening scores.Over the past seven years, the United States has become one of the fastest militarizing countries, registering the third-largest change in militarization score from 2014 to 2021 after the UAE and Eritrea. China and Russia are 70th and 81st, respectively, in change in militarization over the same time period.Although the overall change in the global peace index from 2020 is relatively small, only .07%, the report notes that 2021 is the ninth out of the past thirteen years to register a net decline in global peacefulness. The Global Peace Index Report measures global peacefulness based on 23 indicators grouped into three domains: Societal Safety and Security, Ongoing Domestic and International Conflict, and Militarization. A lower score indicates a greater degree of peacefulness, while a higher score indicates less peaceful conditions.

Misha Gusev knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1000560
Armed Conflicts | Data Source Highlight //knoema.fr/npwgqnd/armed-conflicts-data-source-highlight 2021-06-15T08:05:36Z Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
Armed Conflicts | Data Source Highlight

Knoema developed this special visualization series to highlight the variety of sources available to track and examine trends in various types of conflict and terrorism-related violence worldwide. Combined with traditional macroeconomic and sociodemographic information and even new indicators for social unrest and transformation, social scientists to security analysts to the average informed citizens now have easier and more reliable access to this valuable data type than ever before. At the bottom of each page, we offer live links to featured and additional conflict datasources. As always, each dataset includes links to the original data source so that you can learn more about the methodology used by sources to collect, verify, and categorize conflict information. Armed Conflicts | Political Conflicts | Terrorist Attacks  Featured conflict data sources:The Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP)A joint initiative of the University of Sussex and the University of Texas at Austin (Robert S Strauss Center)  Definitions:Armed conflict is defined by the UCDP as a contested incompatibility that concerns government and/or territory where the use of armed force between two parties, of which at least one is the government of a state, results in at least 25 battle-related deaths.Violence against civilians occurs when any armed/violent group attacks civilians. By definition, civilians are unarmed and not engaged in political violence, rebels, governments, militias, rioters can all commit violence against civilians.Conflict is assigned intensity level war if at least 1,000 battle-related deaths are recorded in a given year.Four different types of conflicts are generaly identified: extrasystemic, interstate, internal and internationalized internal.A non-state conflict is defined by UCDP as the use of armed force between two organized armed groups, neither of which is the government of a state, which results in at least 25 battle-related deaths in a year.

Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
Nigeria: Armed Conflicts, Military Spending, and the Economic Context //knoema.fr/yfkakle/nigeria-armed-conflicts-military-spending-and-the-economic-context 2021-06-15T07:55:59Z Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
Nigeria: Armed Conflicts, Military Spending, and the Economic Context

During the mid-to-late 2000s, Nigeria struggled to reign in the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta, better known simply as MEND. MEND is a militant group based in the southwest of Nigeria in the Niger Delta, Nigeria's primary onshore oil production region.  The group sought increased economic benefits for residents of the Niger Delta from the country's oil production and reparations for destruction of the environment by foreign oil companies. The group's guerrilla warfare tactics and deadly bombings were only part of the reason it was so potent; the group also caused severe economic losses by disrupting or shutting in oil and gas production infrastructure and kidnapping foreign oil workers. A second violent group was developing its identity and reach during this same period: Boko Haram. Much of the world learned of the Boko Haram terrorist group after it kidnapped 276 school girls from their dormitory in the Nigerian town of Chibok in April 2014, but for years it has grown in size and capability. Formally established in the early 2000s, this Islamic extremist group gained new momentum and potency in the period 2009-2010 when it started an armed rebellion against the government of Nigeria.  Today both groups have contributed to escalating levels of violence throughout Nigeria, although many of the claims of responsibility by purported members of MEND are questionable. In 2014, Nigeria experienced a dramatic increase in fatalities, reaching about 11,000 deaths, according to ACLED estimates. In late January 2015, after the largest massacre by Boko Haram in Baga (1,700-2,000 killed), a coalition of military forces from Nigeria, Chad, Cameroon, and Niger began a counter-insurgency campaign against the group. By summer, it was believed that the Nigerian military had retaken most of the areas previously controlled by Boko Haram in the northeastern area of the country, however, the first quarter death toll still reached 6,109 fatalities. Violence in Nigeria must be examined in the context of the socioeconomic conditions that have only accentuated ethnic, religious, and geographic divisions in the country. Nigeria is Africa’s largest economy as well as its largest oil producer. Yet, astonishing levels of corruption have left it lagging in basic development and infrastructure in most of the country.Egypt has a population roughly half the size of Nigeria's and yet it has nearly five times the installed power generation capacity, according to data from the International Energy Agency and the World Bank.According to the IMF's 2015 World Economic Outlook, Nigeria also has the lowest total government expenditure as a percent of GDP in the world at only 10.58 percent. The average in Sub-Saharan Africa is 22.4 percent with some countries like Kenya and South Africa spending upwards of 30 percent or more of GDP. Nigeria, for all its violence, lags not only in socioeconomic-related spending, but also in military expenditures.Since 2009 when MEND signed an amnesty agreement with the Government of Nigeria, Nigeria has maintained military expenditures of about 370-380 billion naira, or 2.2-2.3 billion US dollars. In contrast, Algeria - another large African oil and gas producer with a GDP (PPP) about half the size of Nigeria's - spent $11.9B in 2014 on its military.Steady economic growth has also reduced Nigeria's military expenditure relative to GDP from 0.9 percent in 2009 to 0.4 percent in 2014. Nigeria now ranks 39th among African countries by military expenditures as a percent of GDP.  Sources: Armed Conflict Location and Event Dataset (ACLED) African Data (1997-2016)  SIPRI Military Expenditure Database, 1988-2016, Global Firepower, IMF World Economic Outlook (WEO), October 2017 , EIA International Energy Statistics, The World Bank World Development Indicators

Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
The 2017 Global Peace Index | Militarization //knoema.fr/lppcjwg/the-2017-global-peace-index-militarization 2020-09-09T07:36:04Z Ellen Goodwin knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1593850
The 2017 Global Peace Index | Militarization

The 2017 Global Peace Index: Armed Conflicts | Safety and Security | Militarization

Ellen Goodwin knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1593850
The 2019 Global Peace Index //knoema.fr/qnlwwie/the-2019-global-peace-index 2019-11-12T11:31:03Z Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
The 2019 Global Peace Index

The 2017 Global Peace Index reflects the reality of war and peace today with Syria, Afghanistan, and Iraq ranking as the least peaceful countries of the 161 evaluated for the index. The United States experienced the greatest decline in the index since last year, slipping 11 places to rank 114th, directly following Armenia and Rwanda and preceding El Salvador and China.But, what’s in the index? The Global Peace Index is comprised of 23 indicators grouped into three broad themes: the level of safety and security in a society, the number of international and domestic conflicts, and the degree of militarization. In the US case, the deterioration of its score is attributable to an increasing homicide rate and the number of terrorist attacks and mass shootings last year.Nearly 60 percent of the Index countries improved their scores in the 2017 edition, with Europe remaining the world’s most peaceful region. Only Canada and Australia also made the top 10.Learn more about the performance of specific countries on each of the three components of the index: ongoing domestic and international conflict; societal safety and security; and militarization.

Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
World Armed Conflicts Statistics //knoema.fr/zzzvrud/world-armed-conflicts-statistics 2019-10-11T18:55:26Z Ellen Goodwin knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1593850
World Armed Conflicts Statistics

Armed conflict is defined by the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP) as a contested incompatibility that concerns government or territory where the use of armed force between two parties, of which at least one is the government of a state, results in at least 25 battle-related deaths. Country of conflict is a country whose government has a primary claim to the issue in dispute and not the geographical location of the conflict. There are three different types of conflict: interstate, internal, and internationalized internal. Interstate armed conflict occurs between two or more states. Internal conflict occurs between the government of a state and one or more internal opposition groups without intervention from other states while internationalized internal armed conflict occurs with intervention from other states on one or both sides.   Battle-related deaths refer to those deaths caused by the warring parties that can be directly related to combat. This includes traditional battlefield fighting, guerrilla activities and all kinds of bombardments of military bases, cities, and villages. Deaths from urban warfare (bombs, explosions, and assassinations) also considered to be battle-related as well as civilians being killed in the crossfire, indiscriminate bombings, etc. All fatalities – military as well as civilian – incurred in such situations are counted as battle-related deaths. See also: The 2017 Global Peace Index | Armed Conflicts| Safety and Security | Militarization

Ellen Goodwin knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1593850
Sales value of Arms producing Companies in US //knoema.fr/kcfgdzc/sales-value-of-arms-producing-companies-in-us 2019-01-11T12:18:52Z Nematullah Khan knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1975840
Sales value of Arms producing Companies in US

Lockheed Martin, based in U.S. state of Maryland, is world’s largest arms company in terms of sales value. The company manufactures aircraft, radar systems, drones and even components for spacecraft for the US military and foreign states. Its most famous products include the F-16 fighter plane and the Hercules transport plane. The Company sold US$ 44.9 billion of arms in 2017. Boeing, based in US, is world’s second largest arms company. The company is famous for its line of passenger aircrafts. The Boeing made US$ 26.9 billion of arms sales in 2017. Raytheon is world’s fourth largest and third largest in U.S. is primary produces missiles and weapons systems for aircraft and naval vessels. The sales value of arms was US$ 23.8 billion in 2017, whereas total sales was at US$ 25.3 billion.

Nematullah Khan knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1975840
Global Firepower - 2016 | Data and Charts //knoema.fr/wxzygqd/global-firepower-2016-data-and-charts 2018-12-19T13:18:40Z Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
Global Firepower - 2016 | Data and Charts

Global Firepower (GFP) provides a unique analytical display of data concerning today's world military powers. Over 100 world powers are considering in the ranking which allows for a broad spectrum of comparisons to be achieved concerning relative military strengths. The Global Firepower ranking is based strictly on each nations potential conventional war-making capabilities across land, sea and air. The nuclear capability is not taken into account. The final ranking also incorporates values related to resources, finances and geography. The Global Firepower ranking is based on a formula utilizing over fifty different factors, compiled and measured against each nation. Bonuses (ex: low oil consumption) and penalties (ex: high oil consumption) are applied to further refine the list. The finalized GFP value is recognized as the "Power Index"  which supplies a nation its respective positioning in the rankings.  Power Index & Country Ranks       Man Power      Land Systems      Air Power      Naval Strength      Compare Countries

Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
The World's Nuclear Forces //knoema.fr/dlawtsb/the-world-s-nuclear-forces 2018-01-29T08:12:07Z Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
The World's Nuclear Forces

Nine countries in the world are nuclear-capable: China, France, India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. As of January 2017, these nuclear powers possessed approximately 14,935 nuclear weapons, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).Almost 40 percent of total nuclear forces are warheads in central storage that would require some preparation to deploy, such as transportation and loading onto launchers.SIPRI estimates that 27.8 percent of total nuclear forces are warheads placed on missiles or located on bases with operational forces. Russia and the US possess the largest nuclear warhead arsenals in combat readiness, with 1,950 and 1,800 weapons, respectively. Even as the total global nuclear weapons arsenal has gradually decreased, some of the nuclear nine continue to build their nuclear potential. The global stockpile of nuclear weapons has decreased almost fourfold since 1986 when the volume of these weapons reached a peak of about 65,000 units.China, India, and Pakistan have each added 10 nuclear warheads to their arsenals during 2017. In addition, US President Donald Trump said in July that he wants to achieve a huge increase in nuclear capability of the United States. According to research estimates, half of the US' existing weapons stock contains enough power to destroy the population of more than a dozen countries.During 2017, North Korea also performed nuclear tests in violation of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty of 1996, which banned nuclear explosions. 

Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
Nuclear Testing: North Korea Breaking Ban //knoema.fr/fogdpv/nuclear-testing-north-korea-breaking-ban 2017-10-04T17:00:03Z Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
Nuclear Testing: North Korea Breaking Ban

On September 11, the UN Security Council adopted its 8th sanction resolution against North Korea. The resolution came in response to the country’s nuclear test on September 3 in violation of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty of 1996 (CTBT) banning nuclear explosions regardless of purpose. The test was the sixth violation by North Korea. Previously, North Korea conducted nuclear tests in 2006, 2009, 2013, and twice in 2016. Each time North Korea has conducted nuclear tests, the UN Security Council has responded by adopting new sanction resolutions against the country. A total of eight sanction resolutions have been adopted, including two additional resolutions after North Korea's successful satellite launches in 2012 and 2016.Except for North Korea, only India and Pakistan have violated the CTBT; each conducted nuclear tests twice in 1998. Although the UN has now imposed a variety of sanctions on North Korea, the sanctions primarily restrict the trade of specific products.Exports. The full list of North Korea exports embargo now includes all weapons, copper, nickel, silver, zinc, lead and lead ore, iron and iron ore, coal, seafood, textile, helicopters, and statutes. Excluding weapons and helicopters, for which no data is available, the covered products constitute about 74 percent of North Korea's exports, with coal and textile the major export products. The UN added these products, except weapons, to the embargo list in 2016 and 2017.Imports. Restrictions on imports include weapons, luxury goods, nuclear and missile dual-use technologies, crude oil and all refined petroleum products, and all condensates and natural gas liquids. Petroleum products are the country's primary imported products, accounting for about 6 percent of the country's total imports. You could say, “they” started, they being the United States and the former Soviet Union, and the world is certainly watching to see how they (and others) will end it now that North Korea increasingly dismisses all overtures for reigning in its military ambitions. In addition to sanctions, the US is seeking to encourage foreign governments, such as Sudan, to limit engagement with and support of Pyongyang.Nuclear testing began in July 1945 when the United States tested its first atomic bomb. The United States detonated 1,032 nuclear explosions from 1945 to 1992; the Soviet Union, 715 during roughly the same time period. A distant third in total detonations is France with 210, followed by China and the UK with 45 detonations each.During the five decades between 1945 and 2006, countries used more than 60 locations to detonate more than 2,000 nuclear devices. For some cases, the testing assists researchers to understand how such weapons act in different conditions and estimate the threat such detonations pose to the public. For others, like North Korea, nuclear testing is more political, a national assertion of military, scientific, and national preeminence. 

Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
The Cost Of Violence //knoema.fr/fxsoqee/the-cost-of-violence 2017-06-22T10:56:22Z Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
The Cost Of Violence

Escalating civil strife and the consequent refugee crisis have been among the key drivers in increasing the cost of global violence containment*, according to the 2016 Global Peace Index published by the global think-tank, the Institute for Economics and Peace. The total economic impact of violence last year reached US$14.3 trillion, or 13.4% of global GDP. That’s equivalent to the combined economies of Canada, France, Germany, Spain and the UK. Large increases in violence costs have occurred in deaths from internal conflict, IDP and refugee related costs, UN peacekeeping costs and GDP losses from conflict. Excluding North Korea, the ten countries with the largest violence containment expenditure as a percentage of GDP are in Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa and MENA. Seven of these countries are involved in some form of civil conflict, which has become a major driver of violence containment expenditure in recent years. In absolute terms, the countries with the largest violence containment expenditure are the United States, China, Russia, India and Brazil. These countries account for 54 per cent of total violence containment expenditure while also accounting for 45 per cent of world GDP and 46 per cent of the world’s population. See also: Global Peace Index, 2017 * Violence containment is the economic activity related to the consequences or prevention of violence where the violence is directed against people or property. Source: Global Peace Index (GPI), 2017

Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
Ongoing Armed Conflicts, 2014-2015 //knoema.fr/jngplk/ongoing-armed-conflicts-2014-2015 2016-08-26T15:43:12Z Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
Ongoing Armed Conflicts, 2014-2015

Since January 2014, armedconflicts and war have killed more than214,000people worldwide.Approximately one thirdof all victims-about 77,000 people - were claimed in thewar in Syria alone during the period. An additional 40,000 casualties are attributable to a conflict minimally discussed by Western media -the civil war that erupted in December 2013 in South Sudan, the world's youngest country. The war in Ukraine, which began in 2014, had already taken at least 4,843 lives. Some ongoing conflicts last for decades. The combined death toll of the conflicts in the Democratic Republic of the Congo since the 1970s - including the LRA insurgency, Katanga insurgency, and the Kivu conflict - has surpassed 400,000. In Burma (Myaynmar), internal conflict since 1948 has added another 200,000 to the worldwide death toll. Meanwhile, the nearly decade long Mexicon drug wars is estimated to claim 5,000-10,000 victims annually. Learn more about the tragic statistics of modern wars from the detailed table at the bottom of the page (columns are sortable). All data is based on the crowdsourced Wikipedia data compliations.

Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
The World - Paramount Armed Forces //knoema.fr/qvrumpc/the-world-paramount-armed-forces 2016-05-30T09:32:39Z Anil Kumar TN knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1563900
The World - Paramount Armed Forces

A Country's projection of power relies in large part upon its military capabilities. Successfully being able to project and wield that power is a key diplomatic asset. America's biggest conventional military advantages is its fleet of 19 aircrafts carriers, compared to 12 carriers operated by the rest of the World combined. These massive carriers allow the US to setup forward operating bases anywhere and project power throughtout the World.

Anil Kumar TN knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1563900
Total Naval Strenght //knoema.fr/mdvzgtf/total-naval-strenght 2016-05-30T09:32:29Z Mikhail Zhukovskii knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1293430
Total Naval Strenght

Global Firepower (GFP) provides a unique analytical display of data concerning today's world military powers. Over 1000 world powers are considering in the ranking which allows for a broad spectrum of comparisons to be achieved concerning relative military strengths. The user should note that nuclear capability is not taken into account as that would defeat the purpose of such comparisons. Instead, the GFP ranking is based strictly on each nations potential conventional war-making capabilities across land, sea and air. The final ranking also incorporates values related to resources, finances and geography. Some statistics have been estimated where official numbers are not publicly available. Source: Global Firepower, 2014

Mikhail Zhukovskii knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1293430
World Bank Group Fragility, Conflict and Violence Forum 2016 //knoema.fr/wtdujze/world-bank-group-fragility-conflict-and-violence-forum-2016 2015-11-06T06:31:05Z Alina Buzanakova knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1293450
World Bank Group Fragility, Conflict and Violence Forum 2016

Date of Event: March 1-3, 2016 Event Holder: the World Bank Description: The challenge of fragility, conflict and violence has become increasingly complex, spread across a wide range of countries, regions and urban centers. The recent spike in conflicts has led to an increase in casualties, with 60 million people displaced globally – the highest level since the end of World War II. Against this backdrop, the global community marks a milestone with the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals. This ambitious agenda of 17 goals and 169 targets may present special challenges for conflict-affected and fragile states, where many still struggle to provide basic services.  Emerging challenges, including the plight of millions of forcibly displaced people and violent extremism among others also require a strengthened development approach.    In recent years, fragile states and partners have undertaken initiatives that are well aligned with the SDG framework. The New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States, and the recommendations from the World Bank’s World Development Report 2011 on Conflict, Security and Development are both highly complementary. Yet, more needs to be done to reorient development programs to make them more effective on the ground. To help meet this challenge, the World Bank Group Fragility, Conflict and Violence Forum 2016 will focus on how to realize the SDGs in fragile and conflict-affected states, with special attention to SDG16 – promoting peaceful and inclusive societies, providing access to justice, and building effective, accountable and inclusive institutions – as a critical foundation for sustainable development.  By convening a broad spectrum of partners from governments, aid agencies, civil society, private sector, and research institutions among others, the 3-day Forum aims to facilitate a robust exchange of knowledge and experience among policymakers and practitioners, highlighting innovative work and groundbreaking initiatives that can improve development solutions and advance SDGs for all.

Alina Buzanakova knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1293450
FSU Countries: Military Strength Magnifies Value of NATO //knoema.fr/dopfhqd/fsu-countries-military-strength-magnifies-value-of-nato 2015-08-24T16:59:20Z Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
FSU Countries: Military Strength Magnifies Value of NATO

The Global Firepower database published earlier this year provides an interesting perspective on the relative military strength of the former-Soviet Union (FSU) member states bordering Russia as compared to Russia. The contrast is so sharp that any of the FSU countries would almost certainly be unable to defend themselves from Russian military advancement without the direct involvement of NATO or other allied forces.  The Baltic States, Georgia, and Ukraine combined spend fifteen times less on defense than does Russia. While military expenditures offer only a simplistic cross-country comparison - obscuring differences such as procurement systems and how related industries are supported by each government - the data in this case does show a correlation with smaller armed forces and limited resources. For example, the active military manpower of the Baltic States - comprised of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania - is 25 times less than Russia's, and the States have no tanks (vs 15,400 in Russia), no fighter jets or other interceptors, and only small coastal Naval defense crafts.  Based on recent history and official statements, NATO has a standing, unambiguous readiness to assist and thereby almost certainly influences Russia's offensive military plans. Compared to joint NATO forces, the Russian army of today is considerably weaker, even with allies from the Collective Security Treaty Organization.  Sources: Global Firepower, 2015, SIPRI Military Expenditure Database, 1988-2014

Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
NATO: World-Leading Spending Enabling Air, Naval Power //knoema.fr/vmvddfg/nato-world-leading-spending-enabling-air-naval-power 2015-08-20T16:59:41Z Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
NATO: World-Leading Spending Enabling Air, Naval Power

With the international community still assessing the implications of NATO's first deployment test of the Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF) in June in western Poland, the question becomes: how does NATO rank among other military alliances worldwide?  For the purposes of the June exercise, 2,100 soldiers and over 300 vehicles were deployed to Poland within four days, using six trains, 16 flights, and 14 convoys, according to western press reports. In the event of a real crisis, however, the necessary approval of all 28 NATO members to deploy the VJTF would potentially lengthen the response time. Overall, military expenditures of NATO countries are 62 percent higher than the military spending of all other countries combined, according to a report from Global Fire Power. NATO and Major non-NATO Allies have developed more attack air forces and naval power than the rest of the world combined. NATO and its closest allies also have more tanks, artillery, and manpower than the members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and the Collective Security Treaty, including China. Select the indicator to compare NATO forces to other military alliances and the "rest of the world." Source: Global Firepower, April 2015. For the country membership details on referenced groups, refer to the legend at the bottom of the page.

Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
Global Firepower 2015 //knoema.fr/ssmsxvd/global-firepower-2015 2015-07-11T10:50:12Z Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
Global Firepower 2015

Select the indicator and choose countries from the ranking lists to compare the countries Power Index & Country Ranks      Man Power      Land Systems       Air Power      Naval Strength      Compare Countries

Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
Recent Trends in World Military Expenditures //knoema.fr/dspeied/recent-trends-in-world-military-expenditures 2015-04-28T13:27:45Z Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
Recent Trends in World Military Expenditures

World military expenditure totalled $1.8 trillion in 2014, a fall of 0.4 per cent in real terms since 2013, according to figures released by Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) in the latest update of its military expenditure database. World military spending, while falling for the third year in a row, has levelled off as reductions in the United States and Western Europe were largely matched by increases in Asia and Oceania, the Middle East, Eastern Europe and Africa. US military spending fell by 40 bln dollar (in constant 2011 prices) as part of ongoing budget deficit reduction measures; spending has now fallen by 20 per cent since its peak in 2010. The next three highest spenders — China, Russia and Saudi Arabia — have all substantially increased their military expenditures, with Saudi Arabia’s increase of 17 per cent making it the fastest increase of any of the top 15 spenders worldwide. In 2014, for the first time in history, Saudi Arabia has become world's top country in the terms of military spending per capita ($2747 nominal US dollars). The SIPRI Military Expenditure Database contains consistent time series on the military spending of 171 countries since 1988. Data for each country is shown in the various formats: nominal and real US Dollars military expenditure, expenditure as a shares of country GDP and overall government spending and on the per capita basis. Select the metric on the data card gadget to display the interactive map and country ranking. Choose the country on the map to see the trends on the graph Source: SIPRI Military Expenditure Database, 1988-2014

Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
How much for the war? World military expenditures over time //knoema.fr/fugtkbe/how-much-for-the-war-world-military-expenditures-over-time 2015-04-27T18:18:45Z Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910
How much for the war? World military expenditures over time

   United States, despite the cuts in military spending during Barack Obama presidency, remains the military leader of enourmous size, though US military expenditures share in GDP relatively low, compared to some countries (Middle East in particular, as shown on ranking gadget). Explore the country and regional trends on historical line chart by selecting the country in the ranking list or easily identify countries, which increase the military expenditures share in GDP, on the world map and the barchart at the page bottom. Such increases sometimes may precede military conflicts (e.g., look at the Georgia 2007 or Ukraine 2013). Observe countries military spending with SIPRI military expenditures data and Knoema visual gadgets.

Alex Kulikov knoema.fr://knoema.fr/user/1847910