Arms Race: Italy Leads the Way Among Highest-Spending Countries

Index of topics

MILITARY SPENDING BOOM

Arms spending has never been so high worldwide. And this is not just due to the war in Ukraine, which has become Europe's largest arms importer and the fourth largest in the world. According to data published by SIPRI (the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute), in 2022, European arms spending reached $345 billion , a 13 percent increase over the previous year, and globally it reached $2.240 trillion, a historic record. From whom and what do we think we're defending ourselves with these booming purchases? For nearly thirty years, since the fall of the Berlin Wall, Europe hasn't seen such a significant increase in military spending. But back then, we were in the Cold War and the world was divided into blocs. More understandable, but decidedly more worrying, is the increase in military spending within the purview of three powers: the United States, China, and Russia, which account for 56 percent of military investments.

AMERICA AND THE ARMS RACE

The United States, long considered a warmonger, increased its arms spending by only 0,7 percent in 2022; China by 4,2 percent (a 63 percent increase over the last decade); and Russia by 640 percent, obviously due to the invasion of Ukraine. These numbers tell us only one thing: the arms race is fueling a conflict between powers that threatens global security. Rather, America, where the arms industry is also a very powerful lobby, cosseted by both Democrats and Republicans, increased its exports by 17 percent. Fifty-five percent of the weapons imported by European NATO countries come from US factories. The war in Ukraine and the increase in the Atlantic Alliance's military capabilities, even if World War III is not on the horizon, are not at all unpleasant for the US arms industry.

WEAPONS SPENDING IN ITALY

And now we come to Italy. When the 2023 budget law was approved, the Italian Parliament decided to raise military spending in Italy to 2 percent of GDP. That's approximately €38 billion per year, almost double the €21,4 billion we spent in 2019, before the pandemic. A choice worthy of an Italian operetta, made under the motto "Let's arm ourselves and go," because these weapons we're buying are useless. And fortunately, for us, war is prohibited by the Constitution.

WHO SELLS WEAPONS TO IN ITALY

According to SIPRI's analysis, between 2019 and 2023, Italy increased its arms exports by 86 percent, more than any other nation in the world. France also significantly increased its arms exports (+47 percent), overtaking Russia in the world rankings. The most striking, and worrying, statistic concerns the destination of Italian-produced weapons: 71 percent go to the Middle East, particularly Qatar, Egypt, and Kuwait. These countries are not known for their democracy, and we know nothing specific, other than news reports, about the use made in these countries of the weapons sold by Italy.

WHAT DOES THE MILITARY SPENDING BUDGET PROVIDE FOR?

In the 2023 military spending budget, which marks an all-time record for Italy, regarding waste, utter inefficiency has been repeatedly highlighted. We rush to purchase weapons, but meanwhile we have an oversized army, with 162.000 personnel that, according to a 2012 law, should decrease to 90.000 military personnel and 6.300 civilian personnel by 2024. But since the laws in Italy are written in sand, it's clear that the war in Ukraine, and the increase in the defense budget, will be a good opportunity for the defense lobby to freeze the reduction in personnel. We have overpaid generals , and barely 4 percent of spending is allocated to training. We're buying weapons we won't know how to use.

COMMON EUROPEAN DEFENSE

While it's unclear what purpose all these weapons we continue to buy are really serving, two things are certain. The war in Ukraine should have been the opportunity, and we are wasting it, to allow the European common defense project to take a significant leap forward. This is important. Starting with the money, which should have been spent not with a fixed amount per country, but by distributing individual items, precisely to avoid waste and duplication. Instead, everyone has gone their own way; even Prime Minister Mario Draghi has pointed out this inconsistency, thus funding his own national war industry and postponing the European common defense projects forever. The second certainty is that our military are excellent people, who often risk their lives and deserve the utmost respect. But you don't have to be a pacifist to recognize that we can only play one role in wars: that of authoritative and credible mediators . We are not a country equipped, even in national psychology, to wage real war. And we are not a warmongering people, or accustomed to living under arms, as is the case with the Americans. History tells us these things, and we should take them into account.

READ MORE: How to help Ukraine

MILITARY AID TO UKRAINE

Putin's tragic attack has demonstrated what Europe can achieve by pooling its defense apparatus (including weapons). Without the money and weapons from the Americans and Europeans, with which the Ukrainian army was equipped and organized, Putin's blitzkrieg would have been a walk in the park, and no one would have been able to talk about Ukraine's heroic resistance . The rapid and effective joint European effort also silenced the cheap pacifists, and the public overwhelmingly supported a decision that, had it been made by individual states, would have been impossible or at least highly controversial. Even the voice of a true pacifist like Pope Francis was heard to recognize Ukraine's "right to defend itself." This money is well spent and not wasted, not the money for our nationalist ambition.

MORE MONEY FOR WEAPONS

The idea of putting more money on the table to buy weapons cannot, at this point, lead us back to the main beneficiaries of this waste: the entire arms industry supply chain. Companies, dealers, and brokers. People doing their jobs, but with extremely high lobbying skills, as is also evident in the decisions taken regarding increased military spending. We are major arms producers and sellers, and in just one year, our exports have increased by 85 percent. Imagine what levels this will reach after the war in Ukraine. We are senselessly increasing military spending, taking resources away from other areas, including the environment; we are squandering defense budget funds on poorly distributed spending ; we are strengthening our role as arms producers and exporters. Yet, in the fog of hypocrisy, we take to the streets to demand peace for all.

COMMON EUROPEAN DEFENSE OBSTACLES

A common European defense has been discussed since 1956: the founding fathers understood that without combining defense and security policies, with a common army and shared weapons, the entire architecture of the Union would always be extremely fragile. But achieving a common European defense, the heart of true integration, meant, then and still today, overcoming several crucial obstacles. The first: convincing governments, starting with France and Germany, to cede sovereignty in an area where everyone, politicians and military personnel, are fiercely protective of their own power. A choice, once made, destined to be irreversible. And certainly, a united Europe of defense that requires the permission of 27 states to make a decision is unthinkable: the unanimity mechanism, at least in this area, must be overcome. The second obstacle: while Europe has continually expanded since 1956, today achieving a common defense means bringing together 27 armed forces, with sometimes incompatible weaponry . We are witnessing a military Babel, as is evident from the disproportionate number, indicative of enormous waste, of weapons systems—that is, platforms for handling missiles, tanks, torpedoes, and helicopters. In America, there are 30; in Europe, there are 178; in the United States, there is only one system for tanks; in Europe, there are as many as 17.

WEAPONS MANUFACTURERS IN EUROPE

But the most significant obstacle holding back clear and decisive decisions in favor of a common European defense is the extremely powerful European lobby of arms and munitions manufacturers, each in its own country. We're talking about thousands of companies, some of which are part of the national system and boast revenues worthy of the world's top names. In Germany, there are 221 arms manufacturers, in Italy 157, in France 122: each of them has a clear interest in preserving the status quo. Merging the army and weapons would, in fact, mean savings and rationalizing military spending in Europe. This is unacceptable to the manufacturers, who are well-backed at the political level. Thus, contrary to popular belief, military spending in Europe is currently extremely high, and a source of enormous waste: it stands at $233 billion a year , almost four times the $62 billion spent by Russia. The only certainty, faced with so many unknowns, is still the 1956 axiom: without bringing together defense policies and armies, we will never be able to speak of anything resembling a United States of Europe.

WHO HAS MORE NUCLEAR WEAPONS, AMERICA OR RUSSIA?

Nuclear rearmament also has distant roots and cannot be directly traced back to the war in Ukraine. The new phase of growth in spending on nuclear warheads began in 2021 and in America, it has been shared by both Democratic and Republican presidents. Currently, according to estimates by ICAN , the institute that leads the international campaign against nuclear weapons , Russia possesses more nuclear warheads than the United States: 6.370 compared to 5.800. Some of these are placed in five European countries , including Italy , specifically at the two NATO bases of Aviano and Ghedi.

ON THE WAR:

Want to see a selection of our news?

Sign up to our newsletter clicking here;
We are also up Google News , activate the star to add us to your favorite sources;
Follow us on Facebook, Instagram e Pinterest.