World Military Expenditures and Arms Transfers, 1983-1993

The decline of a hegemon can create openings for lesser powers to expand their influence in the world-system. Is this what China is currently attempting to do? This paper contributes to this on-going debate by examining China’s arms transfer activities from a historical perspective. Using data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute arms transfer database and the World Military Expenditures and Arms Transfers database, I argue that the Chinese arms transfer regime has evolved through three phases. In Phase One, China used gifts of arms to compete with the Soviet Union and to expand influence among Third World countries. In Phase Two, China used arms exports mainly to assist national developmental projects. Only evidence in Phase Three supports the emergence of a global strategy that attempts to extend China’s economic, political, and possibly military outreach. This paper suggests that though China has not yet become a contender for world hegemony as Arrighi argues (2007), China has formulated a globally-focused agenda which, in the medium-term, could extend its influence in regions where U.S. domination is relatively weak.

Download Full-text

World Military Expenditures and Arms Transfers

The SHAFR Guide Online ◽

10.1163/2468-1733_shafr_sim010030014 ◽

2017 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Keyword(s):

Arms Transfers ◽

Military Expenditures

Download Full-text

Swiss Defence Industry in the Global Arms Trade – Successes and Challenges

10.20944/preprints202103.0427.v1 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Donatas Palavenis

Keyword(s):

Security Policy ◽

Small States ◽

Sharp Rise ◽

Arms Transfers ◽

Defence Industry ◽

Peace Research ◽

Arms Trade ◽

Arms Exports ◽

Military Expenditures ◽

Successes And Challenges

When we talk about the Defence Industry (DI), arms transfers, and military expenditures we mostly refer to data accumulated by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). In the SIPRI Top 20 list of largest exporters of major arms for 2019, small states hold consecutive positions: Israel takes 8th place, Switzerland is 13th, and Sweden, Norway, and Belarus place 15th, 17th, and 20th respectively. The author analyses the Swiss DI case due to several reasons; its place in SIPRI Top, its sharp rise of Swiss arms exports in the recent year, its Swiss neutrality strategy, the country’s multilingual society, and its all-government approach to the arms industry, though still contributing to the limited scholarly studies on contemporary Swiss DI. This paper aims to explore Swiss DI and its strategies, to identify the country’s defence and security policy influence towards DI, and to discuss the Swiss DI stance and future perspectives in the context of the global arms trade. At the same time, this paper also highlights Swiss DI successes and failures that could be of significant use to other small states aiming to develop or enhance their relevant DIs.

Download Full-text