Security, conflict, violence and war are no longer separate, isolated words. All of them stand for the same aim and purpose. This becomes clearer with the global conflicts getting prolonged year after year. The military costs of the ever-present conflicts do not appear to be settling in the nearby future.
America is no different. Trump had recently advised NATO nations to spend more on defence. He appeared irksome when Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg and Belgium Prime Minister Charles Michel showed less interest in his idea.
What is the rationality behind Donald Trump’s eagerness to urge others to increase their military spending? He has even warned NATO allies like Germany, Canada, Belgium and Norway about not living up to the commitment they made at the 2014 Wales summit, to spend 2% of their GDP on national defence.
Although the American president was committed to the NATO alliance, it appeared useless for him to try and increase the pressure of the common defence burden. What will be achieved if the world remains entangled in a constant web of conflict? Is an American effort to depend more on arms the only way to combat and tackle Russian threats?
As the NATO summit was going to be organised in Brussels almost immediately, Trump wanted to focus on the boosting of military expenditures on the part of other NATO nations. Looking at the past years, one can learn that a mind-boggling sum of $13.5 trillion was spent against conflict and violence in the year 2015.
This gigantic figure reached $14.6 trillion in the year 2016. It was equal to 12.6% of the global gross domestic product. The US alone has spent $5.6 trillion on wars since the 9/11 attacks. As one would have thought, the number of conflicts have continued to swell with the rapid rise in the cost of war.