With the end of Canada’s
military involvement in Afghanistan
the questions about military
spending are already beginning. It is traditional in most countries to cut
military spending, and the size of the armed forces, at the end of a war.
Equally traditional are the complaints that come later about what a bad idea
this is. Unfortunately, even with all our historical experience to guide us, it
is apparent that this is what Canada
is doing.
Canada has approximately 68,000 full-time soldiers and
another 26,000 reservists, the biggest military we’ve had in 20 years. This is
considered by some to be a large force. There are those who believe that large armies are no longer a national
requirement. Many people seem to accept the belief that the world’s few remaining
wars are not fought by powerful national armies but mainly by irregular
guerrilla forces. More over it is accepted that even large countries no longer
need to provide the full range of military capabilities but rather can count on
the generosity of their allies.
The question is, how large
should Canada’s
military be? The corollary would be, is it really that big now? Big compared to
what?
Depending on your definition of a country there
are 196 recognized countries. In the
context of size alone Canada
has a regular military strength that put us at about 55th from the
top of the list. By other measures we are 57th from the top. In that context it doesn’t seem like a lot, but there is more
then one way of measuring military strength
Another way of measuring the
size of Canada’s
current military is the Global Militarization Index. The Global Militarization Index tries to describe
the relative weight and importance of the military apparatus of a state in
relation to its society as a whole. There
are a number of indicators used to represent the degree of militarization of a
country, They include a comparison of military expenditure with gross domestic
product, a comparison of military expenditure with health expenditure, a contrast
between the total number of military forces with the number of physicians, and
the overall population and the ratio of the number of heavy weapons available
and the overall population. On that scale Canada is rated as 88th out of 138 countries measured.
Canada is a rich country and that is also reflected in our
military spending. Based on our gross domestic product , which is the value of all goods and services
produced by the state and estimated from purchasing power parity calculations,
Canada has the 13th richest economy in the world
The respected Stockholm
International Peace Research Institute calculates that Canada has the 14th largest defence budget in the
world. For what it is worth, the CIA reckons
that our military spending ranks Canada as 83rd out of 132 countries
listed. That would appear to more in line with some of the other statistics
quoted here.
The World Bank reports that Canada spent an average of 1.2% of
our GDP on our military in the years between 2009 and 2012. This ranks us as about 122nd
out of all countries. Despite NATO recommendations that nations spend 2% of GDP
on their militaries on average defence spending of our European NATO Allies was 1.62 percent of GDP.
The vast majority of the
worlds military spending is done by those nations in the top ten of spending.
There is a huge gap between those nations and all the rest with the top ten
accounting for something like 65% of all military spending. Having said that, it is also true that these
figures indicates that Canada spends more on its military then three quarters
of all the other countries on the planet.
With due regard to the
malleability of statistics, these figures show that, on the whole, Canada does
not spend a great deal on defence compared with other nations. It should also
be noted that this is not necessarily a bad thing.
What is a bad thing is the
notion, common to most of those who comment on this subject, is that war is
something Canada
can control. It is the belief that that all our military endeavors will be
discretionary.
Our military, the whole
DND/CF complex, exist as a kind of insurance policy. An insurance policy is
used to manage risk. Our military is expected to deal with everything from
flooding rivers to armed attacks on our country. The risk of flooding rivers is
very high, which is mitigated by the ability to accurately forecast the damage
such an event would cause. Conversely the chance of an armed attack on Canada is very
low, but it is almost impossible to forecast the costs of such an attack.
Our collective experience
since World War II has led us to a grave misunderstanding of the nature of war.
The reality is that history and human experience teach us that we to not always
get to decide when lethal force, or the threat of it, is necessary to safeguard
those interest which we believe to be vital. By the very nature of conflict,
other voices get a vote.
Very few people predicted the
attacks of 9/11. Even a month ago not many people were raising concerns about instability in the Ukraine. These events were in many
ways beyond our control but they are forcing us to respond. Canada
needs an independent military force compatible with our place in the world and
our ability to reasonably pay for it. It is an insurance policy, not for the
things we want to do, but rather insurance against the chance that we will need
to use it, even if we don’t want to.
Canada’s military policy doesn’t add up
The Number of Countries in
the World
List of countries by number
of military and paramilitary personnel
A list of active military
personal by country
List of countries by Global
Militarization Index
List of countries by GDP
(PPP)
List of countries by military
expenditures
Country Comparison:: Military
expenditures
Military expenditure (% of
GDP)
Country Comparison >
Military expenditures - percent of GDP
NATO in the Land of Pretend
Command Authority By Tom
Clancy with Mark Greaney
Crimean crisis forcing Harper
to rethink defence
