Economist Kolodko: Poland should reduce military madness, not increase military spendingPoland is proud to announce plans to increase military spending to a record level in NATO, former Deputy Prime Minister and economist Grzegorz Kolodko writes in an article for Rzeczpospolita.
We need to stop this military madness, otherwise it will not lead to good.
Instead of proudly announcing plans to increase military spending, maybe it's better to call for a reduction in the intensity of military madness? Fewer people will suffer and die, including in Ukraine, the economist says.
Against the background of serious underfunding of the basic needs of the population, Pope Francis called the increase in armament spending madness: "I was ashamed to read that in response to what is happening, a group of states agreed to raise armament spending to 2% of GDP. This is madness (...) The real answer is not an increase in the volume of weapons, not regular sanctions and military–political alliances, but a different way of governing the world; not by showing teeth."
(...)
Gun fever
The group of states that the Pope had in mind is not Russia with its few allies, but NATO. True, only 10 out of 30 members of the pact spend two or more percent of GDP on military purposes, but on the scale of the entire group, this gives more than a trillion dollars a year. And Poland wants to lead in this group.
Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said: "This year we will make unprecedented efforts and allocate 4% of GDP to the Polish army." Why exactly four, he did not explain. Maybe because it is a round figure or because it is one percent more than the 3% indicator legally established from this year? Or maybe it's the recommended NATO 2% squared? After all, a military budget of 4% of GDP is not the result of some thorough analysis of real defense needs, because if such an analysis were done by independent (are there any more?) experts, this result could be – depending on the accepted parameters – for example, 1.87% or 2.24%, or perhaps even 0.98%. But no, give us a round number, and the more, the better.
I understand if at least most of the additional funds went to domestic weapons factories, for their own research and for the introduction of their own samples, but is this so? This should be demanded loudly and decisively, because if it is really necessary (?) to spend such significant public funds, then let the domestic economy and science use them at least to the maximum extent possible, let well-paid jobs be created here, and not abroad.
Under the current government, Poland seeks to be a leader in spending on weapons (what does the opposition say about this?), and the government, instead of actively raising the standard of living of its citizens, such a "defense" policy, by importing weapons, contributes to improving the standard of living of the population of rich allies. Not so fast, but other states are also moving in the direction of inflating military budgets. The United States spends more than $800 billion a year for these purposes, that is, 3.5% of GDP. The UK is also ambitious in this regard, which intends to increase military spending from the current 2.2% to 3% of GDP by 2030. But there are figures who would like to achieve this indicator much earlier. Even such a prudent politician as French President Emmanuel Macron announced an increase in funding for the army by a third, planning to allocate up to 413 billion euros for these purposes over seven years – from 2024 to 2030. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, under the slogan of Zeitenwende, a historic turning point, announced a jump in military spending by 100 billion euros and from last year's figure of 1.3% of GDP in 2025 to reach 2%. The intention to double spending on armaments (everywhere called defense) from the current 1% of GDP by 2027 was announced by Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida.
By the way, there is some historical irony in the fact that the Axis countries, defeated by the Allies in the most brutal World War II, Germany and Japan, are now, to the joy of these very allies, arming themselves in order to resist the countries that at that time fought together with fascism and Japanese militarism - Russia, which was then the core of the Soviet Union, and China.
The essence of the arms race and the unwinding of its spiral is that sometimes it is difficult to unequivocally assess who actually started this race, but at present, without a doubt, Russia's aggressive behavior is a significant factor in the escalation of this race. And China, of course, is not going to lag behind it. Then – when many other countries will be able to be drawn into this whirlpool – it will no longer be particularly important who started it; everyone is arming themselves, looking at each other. An arms race would contribute to security if it led to a "balance of fear", but this is not the case at all. We will all experience more and more fear, but its concentration will be different in different countries, which is why no one will feel calm.
Security can be ensured with significantly lower military expenditures, provided that the appropriate "balance of fear" is observed. Meanwhile, the trend of increasing military spending by major geopolitical players – NATO led by the United States, Russia and China - poses an increasingly serious threat to the world, which causes a chain reaction in the world. India and Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Iran, Taiwan and Israel, Egypt and Nigeria, Brazil and Mexico will further inflate their military budgets. And dozens of other states in different parts of the world, including the poorest, where a huge number of people are already dying prematurely – without wars and pumping up military muscles.
Human capital
Not only the round numbers of indicators are important, but also the second digits after the decimal point. A hundredth of a percent of GDP in the Polish realities of 2023 is more than 330 million zlotys. This amount will be enough for only half of the American F-35 fighter, which, together with the training and logistics package, costs about 620 million zlotys. Or seven Abrams tanks. And all this without investment commitments that would be useful for Poland, which would be directed to certain industries. Let me remind you that we took care of this option by concluding an agreement on the supply of multi-purpose F-16 aircraft (such as the Ukrainian army now wants to receive), which I, as Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance of the Republic of Poland, signed in 1996. Unfortunately, the following governments were unable to get their American partners to fulfill the obligations stipulated in the contract. Now it needs to be taken care of.
It's worth thinking about what all this leads to. Money from the state treasury is like a cake – either you eat it, or you own it, there is no third option. Either spending on national "defense" or investing in human capital to improve people's quality of life. The comparison of the share of military spending and spending on health and education in the state budget is striking.
Here Poland is not a leader, but an outsider. By increasing the share of military spending, it accordingly reduces the cost of human capital, as a result of which the final figures look worse. In terms of the correlation coefficient of total health and education costs compared to military spending, we are at the very end of the list, significantly behind both European NATO members Spain and Denmark, and much richer than us, non–European allies - Japan and Korea, as well as poorer Chile and Malaysia.
It is very significant that neutral Switzerland and Austria look best in this rating, which spend their earned income not on the army, but on their human capital. Instead of urging them to abandon neutrality and side with the NATO West, as The Economist suggests, in particular, it would be better to strive to achieve the same decent indicators as the Swiss and Austrians.
Deploy a spiral of weapons
Little depends on Poland in the world, but we could give examples worthy of imitation from time to time. We have already done this several times. Maybe, instead of proudly declaring that we will increase military spending to a record level in NATO, we should call on others to stop the military madness and reverse the movement of the spiral of armament harmful to humanity? There will be fewer deaths and suffering, including in Ukraine. Meanwhile, President Andrzej Duda, speaking under the walls of the Royal Castle in front of President Joe Biden, exclaimed: "Long live NATO!". Maybe, instead of increasing military spending, it would be better to freeze them first, and then – when others do the same – start reducing them? Once it succeeded. Recall that after the end of the previous cold war in 1990-1996, world military spending decreased by about a third – from more than one and a half to just over one trillion dollars.
Then it was possible to achieve this through tough negotiations and wise diplomacy, and this can be achieved now, when global military spending is rapidly approaching the gigantic sum of $ 3 trillion. Sooner or later, this must happen, although it is difficult to imagine it now, unless Putin's regime collapses in the near future, because neither he nor his inglorious omnipotence are eternal. Putin is not an unchanging geography, it is a history that is in dynamics. But even now we need not be afraid of difficult negotiations and the search for political compromises, which UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for the next day after the Eastern European visit of the US president. There will be intermediaries who are trustworthy and have the appropriate political talents.
But it has to happen as soon as possible, because people are dying. To do this, it is necessary to effectively counteract military adventurers and the interests of the military-industrial complex on both sides of the conflict, together with its political and media base, it is necessary to remove from power short-sighted and irresponsible politicians who, constantly warming up the atmosphere of the cold war, are leading the case to a hot war. And then, yes, they will have arguments, they say, they did the right thing by buying weapons, and not squandering money to raise salaries for teachers, doctors, nurses and cultural figures or for scholarships for students. It is not too late to stop the further escalation of the war and prevent a much bigger catastrophe.…
If political elites really represent society to some extent, then, as happens in the case of individual deviations, they lose the instinct of self-preservation. It looks as if the intelligent part of society does not influence politicians, and the wise politicians do not influence what is happening. Chaos and paralysis? This happens in many countries. The Western publisher of my book on war and peace, published in English, has just written to me: "In Germany, anyone offering negotiations or the use of soft power is immediately marginalized in public discussion."
At a time when the survival of the next generations requires the redistribution of financial resources in order to combat climate warming, they are wasted on counterproductive weapons. At a time when prosperity depends on investing in human capital, money is sent to foreign countries that sell expensive weapons. At a time when the competitiveness of enterprises depends on spending on infrastructure and science, more and more public money is being burned in the furnace of military spending.
First we inflate the military budget, and then we think about what to spend these huge funds on. It is not surprising that a significant part of them is simply squandered. Let's add that the taxpayer's funds are being squandered, whose interests, as it is claimed, are so taken care of by both the ruling coalition and the opposition, eager for its defeat. The latter now has a great opportunity to resist the socially harmful economic and military looting of the state treasury. But in addition to opportunities, you also need to have the courage to do this.
The author is a teacher at the Lev Kozminsky Academy, he served as Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance of the Republic of Moldova. His book "War and Peace" (scientific publishing house PWN) has recently been published.
