Email 
Print 
Top gun nations
Written by: AlertNet
Venezuelan civil reservists parade with Kalashnikovs in Caracas. REUTERS/Jorge Silva
A litany of loopholes is helping weapons companies arm abusive regimes and ruin millions of lives a year, the campaign group Control Arms said on Monday as it called for a global binding arms trade treaty. Here are some figures from Arms Without Borders, a report written by the group, which includes Oxfam and Amnesty International.
- Global military spending is estimated to exceed $1 trillion this year - roughly 15 times annual international aid expenditure.
- There are enough bullets in the world to shoot all 6 billion of us twice.
- On average, up to 1,000 people die every day as a direct result of armed violence.
- Military spending is expected to overtake peak Cold War levels by the end of 2006.
- Between them, countries in Asia, the Middle East, Latin America and Africa spent an estimated $22.5 billion on arms during 2004.*
- This sum would have enabled those countries to put every child in school and reduce child mortality by two-thirds by 2015 - two of the Millennium Development Goals.
- Bangladesh, Nepal and Pakistan spent more on their military than on healthcare between 2002-03.
- Some 92 countries produce small arms and light weapons, and 76 make small arms ammunition.
- At least 14 countries make the Kalashnikov assault rifle, including Egypt and North Korea.
- The United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France and Germany accounted for an estimated 82 per cent of all major conventional arms transfers in 2005.
- Emerging exporters include Israel (with four companies in the top 100), India (three companies) and South Korea (three). There is insufficient data from Chinese companies, but it's generally recognised there are at least three significant players in China.
For more on the global arms trade have a look at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute which produces reports every year.
Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.
We welcome argument but AlertNet will not publish comments that are racist, abusive or libellous.
2 responses to “Top gun nations”
Please note that comments should not be regarded as the views of Reuters.
Leave a Reply
When you submit a comment to us we request your name, e-mail address and optionally a link to a website. Please note where you submit a website address, we may link to it via your name. By sending us a comment, you accept that we have the right to show the comment and your name to users. Although we require your email address, this will not be published on the site, and is only required to enable us to check facts with you, e.g. if you are making a claim we can not confirm easily. Additionally, if you would like your comment removed at anytime, you'll have to use this e-mail address when you contact us. To remove a comment at any time please e-mail us at blogs-(at)-reuters-(dot)-com (address obscured to avoid spam) specifying who you are and what you would like removed. We moderate all comments and will publish everything that advances the post directly or with relevant tangential information. We reserve the right to edit comments in order to maintain the quality of the comments, and may not include links to irrelevant material. We try not to publish comments that we think are offensive or appear to pass you off as another person, and we will be conservative if comments may be considered libelous. Reuters will use your data in accordance with Reuters privacy policy. Reuters Group is primarily responsible for managing your data. As Reuters is a global company your data will be transferred and available internationally, including in countries which do not have privacy laws but Reuters seeks to comply with its privacy policy.
Unlike some other content on this website, the written content in this article may be republished or redistributed by any means free of charge. Any use of photographs and graphics on this website is expressly prohibited. You must check whether written content contained in other articles on this website may be republished or redistributed without the express permission of Reuters or the relevant third party provider.
05 Oct 2006 09:37:03 GMT
This is absolutely true and really horrific. Many countries are not interested to invest their money in development sectors; rather they are happy to increase their military expenditures. This is a very bad sign, and this kind of attitude and decisions are not what we expected from them.
05 Oct 2006 12:01:55 GMT
I would assume then that there is a connection to low health care expenditures and the continued reduction in education expenditures. You see, if we assure that there are adequate supplies of guns and munitions, the equipment of war, then when we send our young to battle, they need not be overly healthy or educated as they'll likely die anyway, and money can be made in the process. A morbide though, yes.....but wrong, I think not, just ask the US administration.