GENEVA, Switzerland, June 7 (UPI) -- The deep cuts in global defense spending, of over 30 percent, notched in the 1990's decade with the end of the Cold War, came to a standstill in 2000, and the trend in expenditures, in particular after the Sept. 11 attacks, has again started to shift upwards, an expert survey said.
The Sept.11 attacks, have "directly affected" arms control and international security relations, and many countries are moving to strengthen their military postures, it said.
The Conversion Survey 2002: global disarmament, demilitarization, and demobilization, compiled by analysts at the Bonn International Center for Conversion (BICC), fears that the gains of the last decade, will be eroded as countries try to beef-up their armed forces.
The sharp increase in defense outlays by the U.S. "very likely will force other countries to follow suit," said Patricia Lewis, Director of the U.N. Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR).
In 2000, global military expenditures, the Bonn center estimates, totaled $761.8 billion with industrialized countries accounting for 75 percent, of which the U.S. alone accounted for 43 percent , and developing nations, 25 percent.
"The Americans are increasing their military expenditures, as are India and Pakistan, and the Europeans will also be obliged to increase their expenditures. The Chinese are also modernizing their military and their nuclear arsenal," said Dr. Jozef Goldblat, Vice President of the Geneva Peace Research Institute, or (GIPRI).
NATO countries, such as France and Germany, are under tremendous pressure from the Americans, who think they do not spend enough, to increase their expenditure, and there's also pressure on Japan by the U.S., Goldblat said.
Overall, the 180 page report found that of the 157 countries with reliable data, 90 reduced their military sectors in comparison with the Cold War period, while the military expanded in 63 countries.
Between 1990 and 2000, holdings of conventional weapons such as warships, tanks, artillery and military aircraft,BICC said, were 32 percent less compared with their peak during the Cold War.
In the same period, industrialized countries, cut their conventional arsenals by 46 percent, with the deepest cuts recorded by the former Soviet Republics, knows as the Commonwealth of Independent states (CIS), with 65 percent, followed by Western Europe, 39 percent, and North America, 33 percent, it said.
Employment in the global arms industry which in 2000 stood at 8 million, or less than half the level at the peak of the Cold War, may also once again post increases, it predicted.
"As procurement budgets have started to swell once more -with further increases announced after Sept. 11 - employment in the defense sector may begin to expand in coming years."
BICC also reckons that with military expenditures on the rise again "weapons holdings may follow suit."
According to BICC estimates, the global number of heavy weapons such as warships, tanks, artillery and military aircraft, in 2000 totaled 406,600 units.
The center also anticipates that global military research and development expenditures, which declined in the first half of 1990's, spurred by the recent large U.S. increases, are on the upswing again.
In 2000, global military R&D totaled $60 billion, down compared with about $70 billion in 1993, the report said.
Western industrialized countries accounted for about $50 billion, or about 83 percent, with the U.S. far and away the biggest spender with $37.7 billion, or nearly ten times more then the next largest spender the United Kingdom, with $3.7 billion.
The R&D budgets of other major military powers in 200 were as follows: France and China, $2.9 billion respectively; Germany, $1.7 billion ; India, $1.3 billion; South Korea, $1.2 billion; Japan, $1.1 billion; Israel, 0.9 billion; and Russia, $ 0.7 billion.
On the global terrorist threat, the report points out these adversaries no longer fit the map of world states, and argues that "using military means to counter terrorism is at best inadequate."
BICC analysts assert that "while military means, may constrain the activities of some military groups, military means do not address the root cause of terrorism, which include perceived large scale injustice, poverty, unsolved national and regional conflicts failed modernization, and repressive regimes."
The war on terror the report advocates, "needs to be put on a broader basis ,and aimed at the root causes and factors facilitating, terror attacks, in support of conflict resolution, poverty reduction, freedom of expression, and effective justice."
Moreover, Goldblat thinks terrorism cannot be fought with conventional armed forces, and believes it can only be fought through worldwide co-operation of police forces and intelligence .
Finally, the report says that the transfer of surplus weapons into regions of conflict continued last year.
