MILITARIZATION RECOGNIZES NO CRISES
by Vladimir Mukhin
WPS Agency
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
March 20, 2009 Friday
Russia
INTENSIVE MILITARIZATION OF CIS COUNTRIES SHOWS THAT THE POST-SOVIET
ZONE REMAINS A ZONE LACKING STABILITY; Post-Soviet countries’ defense
costs increase faster than anybody else’s.
SIPRI published an analysis of the shape of international security
and arms spendings and their forecasts. Its specialists expect the
intensity of threats to international security to grow in 2009.
The appearance of conflict areas is even possible in the zone of
Russian interests i.e. on the territories of the so called nearby
foreign countries. At least, the analysis of open data on CIS
military budgets (traditionally including Georgia and Turkmenistan
that do not belong to the Commonwealth) in 2009 leaves precisely
this impression. Crisis or not, the post-Soviet countries’ military
budgets will be spared sequestering. Moreover, their aggregate value
in 2009 will top the 2008 figure by 9%. Russia is the only exception
because its military budget will be sequestered by 8%. Even so,
its arms spending will top last year’s by 3%.
It is going to be the smallest increase of Russian arms spendings
since 2000. In relative terms, however, they more than doubled in the
last eight years. This rise of defense costs in 2000-2008 is typical
of other post-Soviet countries as well.
Arms spendings of some post-Soviet states leave their economies
grossly underfunded. Georgia is the unquestionable leader. Its
military budget amounted to nearly $1 billion or 5% of the GDP in
2008. Georgia increased its military budget more than tenfold between
2004 and 2008. All analysts were convinced that Tbilisi was planning
a war, and a war it was. It was fought in August 2008. Not even the
defeat persuaded Tbilisi to curb its military appetites. Four point
four percent of the GDP in 2009 is a record in the Commonwealth
and throughout the whole continent. The impression is that Mikhail
Saakashvili’s regime is cherishing revanchist plans with regard to
South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
Like before, substantial sums will be spent on national defense in
Armenia (3.6% of the GDP) and Uzbekistan (3.4%). It figures. Armenia is
at odds with Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh and Yerevan believes in
the old better-safe-than-sorry axiom. Uzbekistan has its own problems
– social tension fomented by overpopulation, unemployment, influence
exerted by radical extremist and religious movements.
Countries with relatively advanced raw-material economies – Kazakhstan
and Azerbaijan – reduced defense costs in relative terms. In absolute
figures, however, their military budgets are 10-15% larger than the
year before. Belarus, Turkmenistan, and Tajikistan show a steady
growth of arms spendings too. Their military budgets this year will
top the previous year ones by at least one third. Kyrgyzstan and
Moldova have the smallest military budgets (less than 1% of the GDP),
due undeniably to their being the poorest CIS countries. The military
budget of Kyrgyzstan will be 7.7% down this year. On the other hand,
official Bishkek counts on military aid from Russia – and so do other
Central Asian republics.
Ukraine, too, plans to reduce its military budget this year.
The militarization of the Commonwealth, more intensive as it is than
anywhere else in the world, shows that the post-Soviet zone remains
an area that lacks stability. It is a region where conflicts are
possible, both international and domestic. These latter in their turn
may escalate into all-out wars, given the right (or rather wrong)
set of circumstances. The list of latent conflicts in the Caucasus
and Trans-Dniester region may be extended to include new ones in
problematic regions of Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan
as these latter are vulnerable to export of instability (Islamic
opposition and drug traffickers) from Afghanistan. Coupled with the
problems of the Crimea, Sevastopol, and Russian Black Sea Fleet,
political crisis in Ukraine may foment escalation of tension in
this country.