Dr John Mohan Razu
In the last few years more specifically the nation-states are fixed on the main question: how to safeguard the country against the external aggression? Almost every region and every continent is facing the threat of war or in the state of war. What then is the way out? Being an Indian living in India caught in a web on both sides facing nuclear-powered nations. Added to these the big powers dictating rules and conditions as they are in loggerheads with each other. Unfortunately, we have psychedelic who is currently the president of the United States promised to end all wars when he was elected for the second term. He was desperate going after the Nobel Peace Prize for his cosmetic efforts, but during course of time has totally changed. He took an U-turn which is posing all kinds of difficulties to the world at large.
Recently Donald Trump has on the Truth Social that he would ask US Congress for a $1.5 tn defence budget in 2027, a 66% increase over the 2026 budget of $900bn. Except one or two dominant military and economic powers the rest of the world is reeling from America’s fast and furious military operation in Venezuela and war looming scenarios in Cuba, Colombia, Greenland and Iran.
America’s wrath as the world is facing the Trumpian bluster not knowing what and when would happen. Countries of the world in high alert not just the Western Hemisphere but others also as America has more than 700 naval bases across the world that can reach any part of the world at any time.
Other regional powers such as EU, NATO thought that it was more secured due to Trans-Atlantic Treaty, but regrets for not developing its defence paraphernalia. In the meantime, China which is currently has the second highest military budget globally. Though it has nearly doubled its defence spending during Xo’s leadership of 13 years, but still lagging behind—a third of America. Regarding EU nations—have been forced to raise their military spending since last year because of the pressures put by Trump currently eking out from the lull. Last year at the NATO summit, NATO allies made a commitment to increase their GDP over the next 10 years. Germany plans to increase its military spend from &80bn over the same period. Greenland threat has furthered other border nations of Russia to go all out for an increase.
To put what is happening in the context of Trumpian target military spending within a perspective, it is just a third of the size of the Indian economy. And yet some experts contend that such allocations are actually necessary in the current context. To build the Golden Dome of America to protect from ballistic, hypersonic, advanced cruise missiles and next-gen series attack it involves several trillion dollars. In addition, to build the Golden Fleet, Trump proposed naval initiative. In 2025, US military spending was 37% of the combined military spending of the top 15 countries, according to the SIPRI Military Expenditure database. By 2027, if Trump actually attahins his target, US military spending would be close to 60% of the spending by the top 15 spenders and almost half of global defence spending.
Competing on equal or less equal terms, China’s spending would fall to less than a fifth of America’s unless and until it doubles down and raises its own military spending at a faster pace than United States. If arms race continues that too at this pace would affect the resources for social and economic development of the middle-countries and those less-developed would be caught between development and arms race. The picture is gloomy for the world as well as India. A less than 2% of GDP, India’s defence spending relatively considered low by defence experts. Most of it is used for providing salaries and pensions. Given the regional threats India is compelled to divert its resources towards defence. For improving the military preparedness, India is forced to increase its allocations to defence.
Countries like India is caught in-between vis-à-vis development or defence. During the Cold War countries of the world spent and invested moneys on education, health, and development. During that time the enmity was between two empire-builders. The scenario has changed. All the countries are involved or forced to increase the military expenditure in one way or other. In such desperate context specificities countries somehow want to safeguard and protect their borders and populations at all cost. Only in such desperations arms productions would start. In such situations countries would go for sophisticated arms and weapons. Who benefits? Only those countries and corporations that are engaged in the production of weaponries.
America’s investments in the production of arms and ammunitions and its display of weapons on other countries by bombing is nothing but show of its strength and the efficacy of its air, water, and land powers. Due to this the American government and the corporations headquartered in America would benefit. War is nothing but business and trade. The big powers keep attacking countries and the level of destruction caused would automatically enhance the price of the weapons—all in millions. Therefore, those capitalists and war-mongers keep saying that ‘war is good’ as it makes some as millionaires and billionaires, but many as paupers. War is good and a necessity for empire-builders and its proxies, not good for mid and lower countries. War departments, big corporations engaged in the productions arms and ammunitions and in arms race are politicians, middle-men benefit a lot in the war-game, but the people pay price of their lives and money. Let me bring-in Edward W Said quote to conclude: “Just as some of us outside or beyond geography, none of us is completely free from the struggle over geography. That struggle is complex … because it is not only about soldiers and cannons, but also about ideas, about forms, about images and imaginings.”
