Hi. I'm writing a freelance piece on the increase in military spending pledged in the latest harper budget and its effects on other government programs. Can anyone recommend a site that will break down the numbers in comparison with other NATO partners, etc. Thanks.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: Become a Podcaster | Find a Show
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2012 the authors
Hi! Hap
I'm not a researcher or whatever. But you may find some articles and information which might interest you.
Please don't bother to join or register because it is just a database which I created and maintain.
Calm
Canadian Foreign Policy and Military
http://tinyurl.com/qglta2
American Foreign Policy
http://tinyurl.com/olfmxm
Here are some references that might be of assistance:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0MKY/is_12_28/ai_n6102271/
http://davidakin.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2008/2/10/3516472.html
http://www.rideauinstitute.ca/file-library/morethancoldwar.pdf
You may be interested in COAT reports (By Richard Sanders):
http://coat.ncf.ca/ARMX/cansec/exports/WarExports.htm
This COAT report was produced in support of the campaign to oppose Canada's largest military trade show, CANSEC, which is coming to Ottawa, May 27-28. Learn more here:
http://coat.ncf.ca/ARMX/cansec/CANSEC_campaign.htm
Canadian Military Exports to Countries at War, 2003-2005
By Richard Sanders, coordinator, Coalition to Oppose the Arms Trade (COAT)
http://coat.ncf.ca
Between 2003 and 2005, Canada exported more than $5.6 billion in military exports to 73 countries. Of these 73 nations, 39 had troops that were then engaged in major military conflicts, either at home or abroad. This means that 53% of the countries to which Canada exported military goods during those three years, were directly engaged in wars, invasions and/or occupations.
However, much more significant is the fact that these 39 warring nations receiving Canadian military hardware accounted for a full 90% (i.e., $5.1 billion) of the total value of Canada's military exports between 2003 and 2005.
Click below for a table listing the values of Canada's military exports to countries engaged in war between 2003 and 2005. This table links to the categories of military equipment that Canada provided to these 39 warring countries.
http://coat.ncf.ca/ARMX/cansec/exports/Table1.htm
The data on Canada's military exports to countries other than the United States, comes from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT). Unfortunately DFAIT's data has numerous accounting loopholes which cause the figures to appear much lower than they actually are. For a discussion of the flaws in DFAIT's reporting on Canada's military exports, click here:
http://coat.ncf.ca/ARMX/cansec/exports/DFAITreport.htm
The United States
As usual, the largest recipient -- by far -- of Canadian military exports was the United States. It received 70% (i.e., $4 billion worth) of Canada's military exports during the three years in question. This matches another Canadian government from Statistics Canada which states that "(t)he United States market accounts for the majority of Canadian aerospace and defence exports 77% output exported around the world."
Canadian military exports to the US, between 2003 and 2005, were two and a third times more than the value of Canadian exports to all other countries combined.
Pie chart: US share of Canada's total military exports:
http://coat.ncf.ca/ARMX/cansec/exports/WarExp2.gif
Pie chart: Canada's exports to the US compared to other countries:
http://coat.ncf.ca/ARMX/cansec/exports/Chart-AtWar.JPG
Canada is thoroughly and completely integrated into the military industrial complex as part of the "North American Military Industrial Base." As such, the US government treats Canadian companies as if they were US companies. The Canadian government requires exporters to procure military export permits for all foreign sales except for military exports to the US. The complete lack of trade restrictions on Canadian military exports to the US also means that the Canadian government has been free to hand out billions of dollars in grants and loans to Canada's already highly profitable war industries. Under Canada-US trade agreements, such subsidies are not permitted except in military and energy sectors. The Pentagon is therefore free to take advantage of publicly-subsidized Canadian military products in all of its wars, invasions, interventions, regime changes and bombing operations.
The Canadian government's eagerness to promote and support military exports to the U.S. is evidenced online. For instance, the first link on the Canadian government's "Sell2USGov" webpage, called "U.S. Federal Departments and Specialized Markets," is the US "Department of Defense." This link helps Canadian military corporations to find export opportunities with all branches of the US military and US intelligence agencies, including through the The Defense Logistics Agency, The National Security Agency and The Missile Defense Agency.
Afghanistan, Iraq and Haiti
In practice, the Canadian government's tremendous support for Canadian war industries eager to tap into the huge US military market has meant that Canadian products have been deeply embedded in all major US wars, invasions, bombardment campaigns and illegal regime changes.
The prime examples of large-scale US-led military engagements between 2003 and 2005 were in Afghanistan, Iraq and Haiti.
In 2003, the US began its "shock and awe" bombing campaign to launch the Iraq War, which has since killed an estimated 1.3 million people. The US was by then already engaged in leading its war in Afghanistan which began in 2001. This war has caused the deaths of between 40 and 60 thousand people, including combatants and civilians. Then, in 2004, a US-led "Multilateral Interim Force" (MIF) invaded and occupied Haiti thus ousting its elected government and replacing it with an unelected, undemocratic puppet regime. The MIF was soon transformed into MINUSTAH, a UN occupation force that oversaw the illegal regime change and empowered the Latortue dictatorship that ruled Haiti for more than two years.
Of the 39 warring countries that received Canadian military exports between 2003 and 2005, 33 of them were engaged in one or more of these three US-led military conflicts during this time period. For example, 24 of the warring recipients of Canadian military goods (i.e., 61.5%) were deploying troops and hardware to the Afghan War; 12 of these warring countries (31%) were similarly engaged in the Iraq War and 10 of them (i.e., 25%) were deploying their armed forces for the MIF invasion and/or MINUSTAH occupation of Haiti.
Click here for a bar graph illustrating the above data:
http://coat.ncf.ca/ARMX/cansec/exports/Chart-Countries.JPG
Only 9 of the 39 warring countries receiving Canadian military technology were engaged in major internal, arms conflicts. Among these, only 7 were not also engaged in one of the major foreign war of Canada's military recipients between 2003 and 2005 were involved in major armed conflicts within their own borders but were not engaged in deploying troops to Afghanistan, Iraq and/or Haiti.
The value of Canada's exports to each of the various major conflicts (Afghanistan, Iraq, Haiti and Internal Wars) once again reveals the overwhelming importance of the United States as the main recipient of Canadian military products and services. As a percentage of Canada's total military exports, the value of Canadian military products and services (between 2003-2005) that were sold to countries deploying troops to fight in the Afghan war was just over $5 billion. While this is 89% of Canada's total, documented military exports for that period, it represents an astounding 99% of the value of exports to the 39 recipients of Canada's military hardware that are engaged in major armed conflicts. Meanwhile, the value of Canadian military exports to countries engaged in the Iraq War was just under $5 billion which represents 86% of Canada's total military exports and 96% of our exports to warring countries (during that period).
Click here for a bar graph detailing the value of Canadian military exports to countries fighting in major armed conflicts:
http://coat.ncf.ca/ARMX/cansec/exports/Chart-Values.JPG
In stark contrast, Canada's exports to the nine governments engaged in major "internal wars," namely Colombia, India, Indonesia, Israel, Nigeria, Russia, Serbia and Montenegro, Sri Lanka and Thailand, was negligible. Canada's total exports to these nine countries amounted to less than $14 million. This is less than a quarter of one percent of the value of Canada's military exports to all 39 of the countries at war that are receiving Canadian military products. While a few US troops or military advisors are likely deployed to some of these nine countries, their role is extremely minimal when compared to the major conflicts supplied by Canada, such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Canada's military exports to the United States are by far most important factor in analysing Canada's role in arming the nations at war in the three major armed conflicts discussed here. For example, Canadian exports to the US account for:
79% of Canada's military exports to countries deployed in Afghanistan;
81% of Canada's military exports to countries deployed in Iraq; and
92% of Canada's military exports to countries deployed in Haiti.
if you can find it, there is a very interesting book from the early 90s called "Dismantling the Cold War Economy" that has a very interesting and amazingly indepth view of the costs of the military-industrial complex.
it's amazing to me that we still allow export of weapons, to anyone.
the economy of death. another good critique in Marilyn Waring's work.
our GDP is to a large degree a measure of the production of death, for people and planet.
we need other measures, that aren't based on fraudulent $ 'values'.
Oh, and when you're looking at some NATO member's defence spending remember that in France, Italy and Spain they include the domestic police forces. Different countries prioritize their defence budgets in different ways - non-NATO countries like China and Russia spread out defence spending over various budgets, whereas NATO countries are generally more direct and centralize their spending with slightly more transparency.
Oh, and when you're looking at some NATO member's defence spending remember that in France, Italy and Spain they include the domestic police forces. Different countries prioritize their defence budgets in different ways - non-NATO countries like China and Russia spread out defence spending over various budgets, whereas NATO countries are generally more direct and centralize their spending with slightly more transparency.
That's a laff riot. Missing Trillion$ The Pentagon says they cant submit to a federal audit until at least 2015. Socialism for the rich(10,000+ military contractors) in America is more endemic than it ever was in the former USSR.
You're a twit. You lack the comprehension to note the word "generally" and as far as it goes for the US, if you're going to quote 911research.wtc7.net for your source on military contractors you may want to reconsider such sources. The Pentagon is actually quite open about its ongoing procurement costs - it is the bidding process that usually ends up mucking the deals, such as the recent LCS and DD(X) programs. All you need to do is follow the paper trail, plus FOI act challenges, and the various localized interest groups means that basically you're going to know roughly how much money is going to a project (not how each specific cent is going to be used). And of course, you can pretty much guarantee that there are going to be cost over runs and scheduling problems. For what its worth, the Pentagon is a very well organized monopsonistic client that keeps a very long paper trail of its expenditures, and the US Congress is generally speaking really good at being inept and necessarily allowing people to look at the financial books of the US military. Not everything evil is trying to hide that it is wasteful ;)
As for your contention regarding the USSR and its successor states, the post-Stalin Soviet and post-Soviet military-industrial complexes are more or less identical to the American variant. It was simply more centralized and impossibly opaque. I mean, during the Stalinist period there was so much secrecy that many very important projects stalled - particularly in aircraft technology during the mid-late 30s.
As for your contention regarding the USSR and its successor states, the post-Stalin Soviet and post-Soviet military-industrial complexes are more or less identical to the American variant. It was simply more centralized and impossibly opaque. I mean, during the Stalinist period there was so much secrecy that many very important projects stalled - particularly in aircraft technology during the mid-late 30s.
Well the RAND Corporation certainly did produce reports for the US government estimating that the Soviets were spending as much as 50% of GNP on defence. Pentagon capitalists and their hirelings in government used those inflated estimates to justify wild and out of control Keynesian-militarism in the US. It was the cold war, and the truth tended to be distorted often. An old Chinese proverb says military numbers are always exaggerated.
"We know it's gone. But we don't know what they spent it on," said Jim Minnery, Defense Finance and Accounting Service.
Minnery, a former Marine turned whistle-blower, is risking his job by speaking out for the first time about the millions he noticed were missing from one defense agency's balance sheets. Minnery tried to follow the money trail, even crisscrossing the country looking for records.
"The director looked at me and said 'Why do you care about this stuff?' It took me aback, you know? My supervisor asking me why I care about doing a good job," said Minnery.
He was reassigned and says officials then covered up the problem by just writing it off.
Big Increases for Intelligence and Pentagon "Black" Programs in 2010
Pentagon capitalists, Wall Street fascists, nuclear power contractors, "black" programs controlled by embedded shadow gov bureaucrats etc all love the open cheque book socialism for the rich in America. Laissez-faire capitalism went boots up in 1929, and nobody wants a return to those days. Not even the so-called capitalists. The Soviet economy wasnt close to being this far down the poop chute by 1989. It's finished. Hopelessly bankrupt. Theyre only fooling themselves right now.Maybe we need two threads, one discussing Canadian military spending and one about Canadian military exports because I feel they are two different subjects.
I think it would also like to look at unions that build military equipment being used in current conflicts. I know the CAW that has several locals that produce military components.
We're a colonial oupost of the empire, Webgear. Contractors in Canada send everything from parts and pieces to high tech weapons components to either the Pentagon or its contractors on the QT. None of it is included in Canadian export GDP figures. It's a closed economy unto itself. Socialism for the superrich in North America is a poorly kept secret. Telecoms operated similarly for many years through today. They have their own accounting methods not taught in higher institutions for learning.
Papal Bull is right on one important aspect of USian Keynesian militarism wrt to the "soft budget constraint" Some of the Eastern block Soviet states made liberal use of the SBC. A very large part of the US economy has nothing to do with free market capitalism still today, and not just the military.
Thanks for your help, everyone. This is very useful stuff.
Anyone here in the Ottawa area? How is the opposition to CANSEC (Canada's largest military trade show, which is coming to Ottawa, May 27-28) developing? Any coverage in the local paper? Richard Sanders has done an excellent job with his continuing reports, but I'd also like to hear from local people.
Sheila Fraser was on The Hour last night, discussing in part military spending. Apparently last year the military misplaced 500 million, and thus was not able to spend it this year. And she is concerned about their bookkeeping skills considering their budget is going way up over the17 billion they currently have as a budget.