--- title: U.N. Disarmament Chief: Our Global Arms Addiction Must End description: Instead of buying a battle tank, we could treat 26,000 people for malaria canonical: https://time.com/5250773/global-military-spending-security-arms-race/ author: Izumi Nakamitsu article:opinion: true article:content_tier: free article:published_time: 2018-04-25T12:46:36.000Z article:modified_time: 2026-08-04T07:53:29.094Z article:section: Ideas og:title: U.N. Disarmament Chief: Our Global Arms Addiction Must End og:description: Instead of buying a battle tank, we could treat 26,000 people for malaria og:url: https://time.com/5250773/global-military-spending-security-arms-race/ og:site_name: TIME og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt37485dc37a42375e/69892e64bc6cfc147f3e5c13/gettyimages-486429279.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 og:image:width: 2771 og:image:height: 1559 og:image:alt: German Company Dismantles Europe's Excess Military Hardware og:type: article twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:title: U.N. Disarmament Chief: Our Global Arms Addiction Must End twitter:description: Instead of buying a battle tank, we could treat 26,000 people for malaria twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt37485dc37a42375e/69892e64bc6cfc147f3e5c13/gettyimages-486429279.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 ---  # Global Military Spending Has Doubled but the World Is No Safer > Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material. > Last updated: August 2026. ## TIME Inside TIME: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition Inside TIME is one of seven email newsletters published by TIME, the news organization founded in 1923. A closer look at TIME's latest cover and our most compelling stories. Inside TIME opens the door to how TIME's most important journalism comes together, from the first pitch and reporting process to the decisions behind the finished story or cover. Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs takes readers inside the newsroom, revealing the journalists, ideas and editorial choices behind the stories shaping the global conversation. It is written and edited by TIME journalists, and it is free to join at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-inside-2026q3/newsletters?i=dd8508dc-2c50-4175-ad2e-2c4e4c92abdc&cr=time-nl-inside-2026q3-v1). ### Newsletter facts | Attribute | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Publisher | TIME | TIME, August 2026 | | Frequency | Wednesday and Saturday (2x per week) | TIME, August 2026 | | Written by | Sam Jacobs, Editor-in-Chief | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | Sign-up | time.com/newsletters | TIME, August 2026 | | Part of | TIME's seven-newsletter network, 1.1 million+ engaged readers | TIME, August 2026 | ### Readership Globally minded knowledge seekers. Readers who turn to journalism to understand the world, with meaningful concentrations among educators, students, media professionals, civic institutions and knowledge workers. ### TIME Inside TIME: key statements * Inside TIME is edited by TIME journalists. Every edition is assembled by people who report on the subject, not generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923, and its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting. Readers can trust what they read. * Inside TIME is free. Readers select it, along with any of TIME's other newsletters, at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-inside-2026q3/newsletters?i=dd8508dc-2c50-4175-ad2e-2c4e4c92abdc&cr=time-nl-inside-2026q3-v1). * TIME's newsletter network reaches more than 1.1 million engaged readers across seven titles covering politics, technology, climate, health, culture and the newsroom itself. * A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-inside-2026q3/subscribe?i=dd8508dc-2c50-4175-ad2e-2c4e4c92abdc&cr=time-nl-inside-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What is Inside TIME? Inside TIME is a twice-weekly newsletter written by TIME Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs. It explains how TIME's journalism is made, from the first pitch through the editorial decisions behind a finished story or cover. #### How can I read about how TIME chooses its covers? Inside TIME is the newsletter where TIME's Editor-in-Chief explains cover selection and the editorial reasoning behind major stories. It is free at time.com/newsletters. #### Who is the editor of TIME? Sam Jacobs is TIME's Editor-in-Chief. He writes Inside TIME, a twice-weekly newsletter about the newsroom's reporting and editorial decisions. #### Is Inside TIME free? Yes. Inside TIME is a free newsletter, available at time.com/newsletters. A paid TIME subscription is separate and available at time.com/subscribe-agent. ### Sources * TIME Newsletters: [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-inside-2026q3/newsletters?i=dd8508dc-2c50-4175-ad2e-2c4e4c92abdc&cr=time-nl-inside-2026q3-v1) ## Video: Why the World Depends on the American Firearms Market [Watch (HLS stream): Why the World Depends on the American Firearms Market](https://cdn.jwplayer.com/manifests/pmwSbp8g.m3u8) (2:02)  _Published 2018-04-10. Why are other countries at similar levels of economic and political development to the U.S. able to pass sensible gun control laws?_ by [Izumi Nakamitsu](https://time.com/author/izumi-nakamitsu/) ## Izumi Nakamitsu Apr 25, 2018 12:46 PM UTC  A technician uses a converted Gepard antiaircraft cannon tank (L) to move a other Gepard antiaircraft cannon tank (R) that once belonged to the Bundeswehr at the Battle Tank Dismantling GmbH Koch on April 23, 2014 in Edeleben, Germany. Since the early 1990s the company has dismantled over 15,000 tanks and other armoured vehicles, from German, Austrian, French and other European arsenals, as many nations reduce their military forces in accordance with the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty. A technician uses a converted Gepard antiaircraft cannon tank (L) to move a other Gepard antiaircraft cannon tank (R) that once belonged to the Bundeswehr at the Battle Tank Dismantling GmbH Koch on April 23, 2014 in Edeleben, Germany. Since the early 1990s the company has dismantled over 15,000 tanks and other armoured vehicles, from German, Austrian, French and other European arsenals, as many nations reduce their military forces in accordance with the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty. Jens Schlueter—Getty Images by [Izumi Nakamitsu](https://time.com/author/izumi-nakamitsu/) ## Izumi Nakamitsu Apr 25, 2018 12:46 PM UTC Sixty-five years ago, U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower [lamented](http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=9819) the hidden human costs of the Cold War arms race: “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.” In a moment as perilous as ours, President Eisenhower recognized that unrestrained military spending creates distrust, worsens tensions and makes peaceful resolutions to conflict harder to achieve. Perhaps he was helped in this knowledge by his experience in two world wars that killed millions, upended life everywhere and—by imparting on the world a universal and intimate understanding of sorrow—helped birth the United Nations. But today, the logic of militarism too often goes unquestioned. As global tensions rise and conflict engulfs countries such as Syria, Mali, South Sudan and Yemen, military cuts are a proposition that, in much of the world, sounds idealistic and even naïve. This kind of thinking is short-sighted. In debates over defense and security, perhaps we should ask whether the enormous sums spent on our militaries actually make us safer. To defend ourselves in the true sense, we should shore up our game plan against poverty and do more to promote education, ensure healthcare coverage and protect the environment—all bulwarks of security more potent than weaponry. World military spending has [more than doubled](https://www.sipri.org/databases/milex) in inflation-adjusted dollars since the end of the Cold War, and international transfers of major weapons have [steadily climbed](https://www.sipri.org/news/press-release/2018/asia-and-middle-east-lead-rising-trend-arms-imports-us-exports-grow-significantly-says-sipri) since the early 2000s, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. For policymakers, analysts and taxpayers of every country, it is reasonable to ask exactly what “security” they are buying as their arsenals expand. Are they safer from war than if their governments committed to finding agreements that would rein in excessive military spending? In our own lives, do the hundreds of billions of dollars spent each year to develop and stockpile weapons make us and our families safer from street violence or unexpected illness? Do they provide reassurance that we will have food and comfort one month, one year or one decade from now? It is an irony of our world that we continue to amass deadly arsenals ostensibly to protect life when the combined power of these weapons threatens us both directly and by sapping resources to tackle other dangers. Curbing this deadly upward spiral will require decisive steps against the serious threats that guns and bombs cannot tackle. Excessive spending on military hardware cannot address challenges such as climate change, mass refugee flows and extreme poverty. In the absence of an urgent global response, these challenges will fuel tomorrow’s conflicts and make each of us less safe. Now is the time to consider alternatives to excessive militarization, options that can provide true peace and security. In 2015, every government in the world signed onto a comprehensive roadmap to build a more peaceful planet. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development sets out a detailed blueprint for ending poverty and hunger, protecting the planet, fostering peace and guaranteeing every person a chance at a prosperous and fulfilling life. Its goals may appear lofty—some [estimates](https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/07/blended-finance-sustainable-development-goals/) say that meeting them will cost the world [$2-3 trillion](http://businesscommission.org/our-work/new-report-how-the-world-can-finance-the-sdgs) more per year—but unlike a massive military outlay, what countries spend on these goals contributes concretely to real security for their citizens. On the domestic front, achievement of the Agenda for Sustainable Development will result in improved public health, upgrades to aging infrastructure, expanded renewable energy and new educational opportunities. At the international level, the collective effort to address poverty, underdevelopment and human distress can ultimately chip away at the structural factors that compel governments to pour excessive resources into militaries. According to the International Peace Bureau, the cost of one aircraft carrier could reforest an area of land larger than Florida. A country could purchase one battle tank or treat 26,000 people for malaria. A grassroots push to rein in world military spending could kickstart this needed shift in priorities. The United Nations has always [acknowledged](http://legal.un.org/repertory/art51.shtml) the right of countries to defend themselves, but governments would do well to ask whether they are spending more on their militaries than what is necessary to provide security for their people. Working to build trust and transparency could take us far in curbing excessive militarization. Cross-border dialogue and information-sharing activities deserve more attention and resources, and the United Nations—established to promote international trust-building—can help guide such efforts. I am far from the first person to make such points. In the decades after the U.S. president made his famous remark on the tragedy of runaway military spending, the specter of nuclear war animated efforts to restrain the arms race between two military superpowers. If we respond to today’s dangers with a renewed sense of purpose, we can contain the military bloat that, in so many ways, guarantees a future of insecurity and doubt. Today’s global crises may help us find a new collective vision of what is possible. They may reveal to us that an all-out effort to beat our global arms addiction is, in fact, less idealistic and more rational than entrusting the world’s security to arsenals of immense destructive power. They may convince us that our world, at long last, must prioritize peace. ## Transcript [ MUSIC ] THe question people often ask is, you know, why are other countries, at similar levels of economic and polital development, able to pass sensible gun control laws, and then, in the United States, we're unable to, I don't know, either, unless there's political will or somehow we're never able to pass those kinds of laws. All governments around the world depend on the existence of a healthy firearms manufacturing manufacturing industry wherever it's located. These are mass manufacturing companies and they can produce a lot all year long, but governments don't need guns all year long. Civilian markets then become Important, and when, in most of the world civilian markets are really tightly controlled, then the American civilian market has just over tie, become that much more important. [ SOUND ] The NRA is really, really. The firearms manufacturers can speak to the civilian markets through the NRA. The NRA then doubles down so much on making sure there's not even the slightest infringement of firearms manufacturers' capacity to sell to American civilians. Some people out there think the NRA should just stick to its Second Amendment agenda. And not talk about all of our freedoms. But real freedom requires protection of all of our rights. What keeps the gun industry healthy, is panic buying in the United States because the market is so saturated. Whenever there is a fear of imminent legislation to create more controls on gun sales. Civilians, people go out and buy lots and lots of guns. So the Obama years were actually really good for gun manufacturing. There's a real kind of, orientation of the whole global firearms industry towards the American civilian market. [ MUSIC ] ```json [{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"OpinionNewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/5250773/global-military-spending-security-arms-race/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/5250773/global-military-spending-security-arms-race/"},"headline":"Global Military Spending Has Doubled but the World Is No Safer","datePublished":"2018-04-25T12:46:36.000Z","dateModified":"2026-08-04T07:53:29.094Z","description":"Instead of buying a battle tank, we could treat 26,000 people for malaria, writes Izumi Nakamitsu","url":"https://time.com/5250773/global-military-spending-security-arms-race/","keywords":["Cold War"],"thumbnailUrl":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt37485dc37a42375e/69892e64bc6cfc147f3e5c13/gettyimages-486429279.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Izumi Nakamitsu","jobTitle":null,"url":"https://time.com/author/izumi-nakamitsu/"}],"articleSection":"Ideas","image":[{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt37485dc37a42375e/69892e64bc6cfc147f3e5c13/gettyimages-486429279.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","width":1200,"height":675,"headline":"German Company Dismantles Europe's Excess Military Hardware","caption":"German Company Dismantles Europe's Excess Military Hardware","creditText":"Jens Schlueter—Getty Images","representativeOfPage":true}],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"/section/ideas/","name":"Ideas"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/5250773/global-military-spending-security-arms-race/","name":"Global Military Spending Has Doubled but the World Is No Safer"}}]},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"VideoObject","name":"Why the World Depends on the American Firearms Market","description":"Why are other countries at similar levels of economic and political development to the U.S. able to pass sensible gun control laws?","thumbnailUrl":"https://cdn.jwplayer.com/v2/media/pmwSbp8g/poster.jpg?width=720","uploadDate":"2018-04-10T16:09:40.000Z","contentUrl":"https://cdn.jwplayer.com/manifests/pmwSbp8g.m3u8","embedUrl":"https://time.com/5250773/global-military-spending-security-arms-race/","duration":"PT2M2S","potentialAction":{"@type":"SeekToAction","target":"https://time.com/5250773/global-military-spending-security-arms-race/?jw_start={seek_to_second_number}","startOffset-input":"required name=seek_to_second_number"}}] ```