GLOBAL DAYS OF ACTION ON MILITARY SPENDING April 10-May 9, by Georgios Emmanouil, representative of NatureFriends to International Peace Bureau

• ‘Disarmament for sustainable development’ – what does it mean?

Military spending and arms production require unsustainable levels of resources, both financially and natural resources (i.e. oil, rare earth minerals, production capacities). As a result, these resources are not available for other areas of society, including public services like education, healthcare, and a green transition. At the same time, both the production of arms and their use have lasting impacts on the environment that last longer than the arms themselves. Sustainable development refers to “a holistic approach aimed at balancing economic growth, social inclusion, and environmental protection to meet current needs without compromising future generations” (UN website). Disarmament efforts, and the freeing up of resources, should contribute to investment in development for all, including future generations. 

• Are we really safer as global military spending reaches record levels?

Global military spending reached $2.9 trillion in 2024, marking ten consecutive years of growth, with over 100 countries increasing their military budgets and the top ten spenders accounting for 73% of global expenditure.

Yet this unprecedented militarization has not produced a more peaceful world. Armed conflicts, geopolitical tensions, and humanitarian crises remain widespread.

If increasing military budgets were the key to security, we would expect the most militarized era in history to also be the safest. Instead, insecurity persists.

In fact, the increase in military spending has led to a new arms race which increases perceived threats and insecurity of all while producing more deadly military weaponry for use in war. 

• What could the world achieve if even a small share of military spending were redirected? (Figures based on 2024 global military spending)

The opportunity cost of militarization is enormous. For example:10% of global military spending ($230–280 billion) could eliminate the global extreme poverty gap.

• Less than 4% ($93 billion) could end global hunger by 2030.
• $114 billion per year — less than 5% of global military spending — could provide safe drinking water and sanitation in 140 low- and middle-income countries.
• $370 billion annually — about 14% of military spending — could provide basic healthcare for everyone in low-income countries.The world has the resources to address these challenges. The real question is how we choose to allocate them.

• What are the effects of weapons on poor communities? 

Weapons have all kinds of negative effects, but they are especially devastating in developing societies and poor communities generally. Examples include landmines and cluster bombs (land rendered unusable, farmers mutilated); small arms (increasing crime levels, high medical care costs); depleted uranium (radioactive contamination of areas affected by military activity); conventional weapons (destruction of people, housing, crops, land, infrastructure…). 

Sustainable disarmament programmes promote sustainable development through removing a whole series of dangers for local communities, and by empowering them to respond collectively to these challenges. 

The world has the resources to address these challenges. The real question is how we choose to allocate them.

• Where will this path of militarization lead us?

If current trends continue, global military spending could reach:

• $3.5 trillion by 2030
• More than $4.7 trillion — potentially $6.6 trillion — by 2035

That would be five times higher than global military spending at the end of the Cold War.

The question facing humanity is not simply how much we spend on defense — but whether endless militarization can ever deliver the security people actually need.

📅 Take action. Join #GDAMS from 9 April to 10 May 2026.