Rising military budgets in the US, China and Japan

Several Western news resources like to announce in their titles that China or that Japan has raised their military budget again. They make it sound as if these countries would be getting ready for war (it is always left open with whom). But this is a mistaken impression they create. The news are not fake: usually the data is in the articles. However, the tone of titles and their wording is obviously misleading. And the data is usually not presented in comparison with relevant trends and info, so it looks scarier than it is.

So, some basic numbers. Most of the following come from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) which is nicely compiled on wikipedia, and also links to the original.

Biggest spenders
At the moment the biggest spender is the US, the second is China, third Saudi Arabia, followed by Russia in the fourth place. Then we have India, the UK, France, and Japan in the 8th place. Germany and South Korea make up the top ten.

GDP relative spending
In terms of GDP the US and China are the biggest economies in the world. Japan follows in the third place, Germany fourth. So Japan and Germany place much further back, they spend much less relative to what they have, than many other countries.

To look at some numbers

the US spends 3.1% of its GDP
China 1.9%
Saudi Arabia 10%
Russia 4.3%
India 2.5%
UK 1.8%
Japan 0.9%
Germany 1.2%

This indicates which countries place a huge emphasis on developing and maintaining their military strength.
It is of course influenced
1) by how risky the country's environment is (but then Japan's should be much higher of course),
2) by how big the country's GDP is (the UK's 1.8% is just a bit bigger than Japan's 0.9% for example), and
3) by local prices (China can pay much less for most military personnel and products because labour costs are lower and many corporations are fully or partially state owned).

Political factors

In some cases the spending is just defense oriented, in some cases it is upkeep and development oriented, and in some cases it is potentially (or very likely) aggression oriented.
For example much of Germany's spending simply goes to upkeep. Japan is developing a good deal this year, but this is mostly defense oriented: since China and Russia, its giant neighbours, are upgrading and developing their military very fast Japan needs to spend on defense. The USA, China, Russia and Saudi Arabia are developing attacking capabilities, spending great amounts on research and new weapons (both development and purchasing).
Of course all countries look at their own safety, but with some we also know that they have territorial ambitions (China has asserted its claim to Taiwan and the South-China sea, so its preparing to fight if others don't simply allow it to capture those territories).

Real terms
It is also important to look at spending in real terms. That is, how much actual money has been spent. The top three are the US, China and Saudi Arabia.

The US has spent 610 billion US dollars (same for all others: billion USD)
China 228
Saudi Arabia 69.4
Russia 66.3
India 66.9
France 57.8
UK 47.2
Japan 45.4
Germany 44.3
South Korea 39.2

In this light we can see that the US surpasses by far all of the others. However its forces are spread out all over the world. China's and Russia forces, although seemingly cheaper, are much more concentrated which might mean that they are stronger in some locations.

It is also telling that the three biggest Europeans don't spend together as much as China.

Japan doesn't spend much more than South-Korea and already that is controversial with voters and opposition politicians. Both Japan and South-Korea have US forces stationed within their borders and could - hopefully, but who knows with Trump - count on the US's support in case of aggression. Still, one wonders whether they shouldn't build up their own, homegrown industry more in the current climate of an expansionist China, and an assertive Russia.

Rise in budgets year on year

This is important because it shows how much need the countries see there is for development. This can reflect worries about their neighbours or rivals, as well as intentions to turn to the offensive.

I didn't look that much into the data on this front but the numbers on the US, China and Japan have been much commented on, so it is easy to have. Again, it is characteristic of reporting that the enormous raise in the US budget is discussed, but usually in fairly realistic terms. I think this is fair, given that the US is in a competition for hegemony in many areas with Russia, China, in West-Asia, in the Arctic, and increasingly also in Africa. This might be morally wrong - as most military building is - but strategically necessary - because if the US would behave better that wouldn't mean the two other superpowers would stop misbehaving.

Anyway, the reported number is 10%, which is "huge" as one guy likes to say.

The reporting on China and Japan has, as usual, been much more alarmist. The funny thing is that both follow trends and both could be anticipated, so, shouldn't be very surprising. Also, from a strategic point of view maybe the Japanese budget doesn't make that much sense - why don't they increase a lot more!? - but the political situation and Japan's foreign policy makes sense of this too - Japan places emphasis on international law, economic relations and rejects employing offensive weapon system, despite all the panic and fear mongering to the contrary that we saw in the Chinese and US media. (The Guardian published a refreshingly well-contextualised short piece on this one.)


China's spending is now officially around 175 billion USD but expert estimate it to be around 225-230b USD actually. Sadly their budget is notoriously secretive. Not even citizens can access it.
This means a raise of 8.1% from last year's spending.

China likes to point out that in terms of GDP their spending has been decreasing. This is just smokescreening of course: its true, but the real numbers, the actual amount has still been rising fast, since the economy grew so much in the last 30 years.

This is in line with their enormous military capability build up. We see that China is getting bolder and bolder. Earlier its goal was just to have sufficient defense against its immediate neighbours (India, Russia). Recently it also tries to dominate its smaller neighbours (Vietnam, the Philippines, Indonesia, Nepal, Thailand) and threaten seriously Japan and South-Korea. It also asserted that it claims Taiwan and the South-China Sea, so, it needs to be able to deny access to these areas to the US military stationed in East- and South-East Asia, and it also needs to be able to counter a possible reclaiming attack. The numbers make sense in this light. Of course that they make sense doesn't mean that they are morally or politically encouraging. China is on the road to aggression under Xi's leadership, and this should worry all of us. Maybe a leadership change would help.

Japan's spending was raised by 2.5%. Yup, this is what the big excitement is about. (Up next! Another RECORD setting 2.1% raise is in line! Notice that almost all the titles use the word 'record. I know its a hard fight out there for readers but this is just ridiculous.) This is in line with their policy to pursue diplomacy and rely on the international legal tools and organizations rather than military pressure. Japan has been following this policy coherently since the end of WWII, so for more than 70 years. Abe is possibly the most hawkish and influential prime minister since the 1960s and still, Japan didn't turn into an aggressor, no matter how much the Chinese media would like to portray him like that. And of course the Japanese spending is still eminently transparent, as it should be in a democracy.

So, think a bit, look into the context and don't judge too quickly when you see a title and a few numbers. Yes, there are rising tensions, yes there is a buildup. But no, no one is going to jump against the others' throat in the next year or two, and no, Japan is not turning into an imperialist superpower again. China is still a long way from contesting US dominance on a global scale, but it can do this already in the local theatre of operations (or war, if there will be one). Russia maintains high spending, Saudi Arabia is building up like crazy, and Europe is maintaining a sensible apparatus.

The Chinese government's concerted PR and military strategy

The Chinese media, war, and economic machine is working because many talented people work in a concerted and devoted manner. This seems to be something that Japan and the US understand but Europe - and especially the UK voting for Brexit - fails to grasp.

China is now not only the second biggest economy of the world but also has one of the most powerful armys and it is not afraid to rely on it to put pressure on business partners and neighbours, as well as countries far from its waters.


The country's highest leadership also understands how important good PR work is and is not shy when having to spend on journalists, internet commenters, academics, diplomats, and even foreign specialists to defend its interests and emphasize a narrative which shows China in a good light.

The true face of the country's current leadership is easy to decipher: it is a hawkish, aggressive band, bent on gaining more power and territory. The current military and party leadership of China won't be a good friend of the UK just because they offer them a decent reciprocal trade pact. In fact, what the UK largely fails to admit is that is has historically played the largest role in the plundering of China during the second half of the 19th century and this isn't forgotten by the Chinese. If the British Empire hadn't forced concessions in several ports and wouldn't have highlighted the weakness of the imperial system in China, the demise of that system could have been slower and more peaceful. Also, other states like the Russian, the Americans, the French, the Dutch, the Germans and the Japanese - who all held concessions and were present with their military - would have had a much harder time in China. Not to mention that the Japanese incursions in the 1920s and 1930s would have likely been impossible.

You can read a great description of government sanctioned tabloid activity, covering the Global Times, here in the Quartz. It shows that the Chinese government keeps the public opinion in China under close control. People are forced to think what the government wants them to think because they don't have free access to impartial information, nor to any criticism of the system.

What I write is also confirmed by the Chinese government's insistence after Brexit to have an even larger access to sensitive technology and energy sectors in the UK. A good example is the Chinese ambassadors address over the Hinkley Point nuclear development. Such smaller and medium sized countries like the UK on its own will be more easily influenced and bought by China in the future. That is one of the reasons why the Brexit decision was disastrous. The UK is already home to many shadowy Russian operations. Now it might become the dwelling of characters who want to strike in the middle of Europe, but were repelled so far by the EU's common foreign policies.

Another example of how even Chinese academics - who are no doubt intelligent and very capable professional researchers - can be recruited by the government and military leadership is a paper by Dr. Xue Li and Xu Yanzhuo in the Diplomat. They warm up the misty-cloudy suggestion designed to deceive that China has been misunderstood, it is a peaceful growing giant, following Buddhist and Taoist teachings when making decisions. This is as false as it can be, as has been evidenced by China's behavior in Tibet, in north-west China, and when cracking down on thousands of protests and demonstrations. It is also obvious that this is false, when we take a look at the way Chinese diplomacy handles the South-China issue, and how the military is now trying to raise the pressure in the East-China sea.

Update in 2018 August: Now that Xi is on the top until his death China has sadly returned to a capitalist-emperor system. Trump and Putin are dreaming of the same, Erdogan has achieved the same, and Orban is dreaming of it. If the country's economy keeps growing as it is now, there won't be any stopping the military-diplomatic bulldozer.

World news highlights - as disguisting as it can get

What a week again! Just the headlines and links to a few news:

France makes it legal for police, military, politicians, etc. to monitor the internet use of its citizens without any special reason.

Japan makes it impossible to provide the public with sensitive information - whistleblowers can face severe punishment. Not as if the government would get its authority from the people or anything, oh no! Not as if people would be worried about what is going on in Fukushima, oh no! ... argh.

China is adamant about making others accept its unilateral extension of military zones, thereby raising tensions in the region even higher.

Romania passes legislation whereby politicians do not count from now on as public officials, so cannot be charged with corruption under certain headings. Bravo!

Russia "manages" to make Ukraine back away from signing a contract of intent to join the EU later.

Some Republicans in the US still endorse quite mistaken views on Mandela voiced by their influential former party members decades ago.

The UK government insists on being poor and only able to support business and raise the salary of its MP's, so further plans of drawing money out of the welfare system are announced.

Aaaand the radical right wings and anti-EU people are still on the rise.

One would think that this is when we would need most people who are committed to, know a lot about, and spread the word convincingly about humanism, democracy, and the programme of Enlightenment. People who can work with institutions, inform the public, convince decision makers, oppose economic lobby and gather public support for implementing virtuous decisions.

Instead, but maybe not surprisingly, this is the time when politicians across the world are calling a halt to the engine of humanitarian and democratic development, by cutting the funding or closing down the humanities and the social sciences faculties.