Studies

New working paper: Analysis of the first R&D projects of the European Defence Fund

For years, the European Union has chosen the path of militarisation andrearmament with a dual purpose: on one hand, to safeguard its economic and geopolitical interests (namely, control over trade routes and accessto increasingly scarce natural resources), and on the other hand, to fortify itself against migratory flows. This paper reveals one of the avenues that the EU has taken as part of this growing militarisation: the European Defence Fund.

On the 7th of June 2017, the European Commission officially launched the European Defence Fund (EDF), a programme for financing research on military products and technology. It was the first time that the EU earmarked resources to strictly military research. The Defence Fund is part of the process of militarisation begun by the EU several years ago.

Work began on drawing up the first EDF work programme in 2021. A call for projects was made and the list of those that had been approved was published on the 25th of January 2023. Out of the 142 projects submitted, 60 were selected, for which a budget of €1,166 million was allocated. This paper ellaborated by Centre Delàs for Peace Studies in collaboration with the European Network Against Arms Trade (ENAAT), the International Peace Bureau (IPB) and the Global Campaign on Military Spending (GCOMS), gives a general overview of the approved projects and a more detailed description of fourteen of them.

All projects analysed in this Working Paper can be regarded as fitting ill with the EU’s foundational principles and values. And the projects proposing the use of new deep-learning techniques in Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) are even more concerning. To carry out this work, authors have drawn heavily on EU data in making our analysis and reaching our conclusions. Key findings include: (1) the EDF subsidies will fund the research and development projects for later weapons production; (2) the EDF will greatly boost military spending in Europe. (3) The report verifies the strong involvement of the arms industry in the conception and implementation of the EDF. Five major European defence companies, specifically Leonardo, Safran, Thales, Airbus, and Saab are taking part in many of the 60 projects selected in the EDF’s first work programme. Furthermore, the CEOs of Leonardo, Airbus, and Saab were part of the Group of Personalities from which the proposal to implement a Defence Research Funding Plan emerged, which ultimately led to the creation of the EDF. Despite their lengthy histories of corruption, misconduct and irregularities, the European Commission did not hesitate first to invite them to participate in the 2015 Group of Personalities and second to select projects in which they participate or even coordinate.

Authors: Pere Brunet, Teresa de Fortuny and Xacier Bohigas.

You can download this report in English as a pdf here.
Also available in Spanish and Catalan.

NEW RESEARCH: NATO 2% SPENDING GOAL COULD DIVERT $2.6 TRILLION FROM CLIMATE FINANCE BY 2028

NATO’s goal of 2% spending of GDP on the military will accelerate climate breakdown by diverting millions of dollars from climate finance and increasing greenhouse gas emissions, concludes a new report that urgently calls for a ‘climate dividend’ similar to the ‘peace dividend’ that was won with the end of the Cold War.

The report, Climate Crossfire, produced by the international research organization, Transnational Institute, together with Stop Wapenhandel (Netherlands) and Tipping Point North South (UK) estimates the likely financial implications as well as increased greenhouse gas emissions that would result if all NATO members meet their commitment to increase military spending to a minimum of 2% of GDP. 

The report finds that:

  • NATO’s military spending this year – $1.26 trillion-  would pay for 12 years of promised climate finance of $100 billion a year.
  • If all NATO members meet its 2% military spending targets, it would divert an estimated additional US$2.57 trillion by 2028 away from climate spending, enough to pay for climate adaptation costs for all low- and middle-income countries for seven years.
  • NATO’s estimated military carbon footprint this year – 205 million tCO2e – is comparable to the total annual greenhouse gas emissions of many countries. If NATO’s militaries were a country, it would rank 40th in the world in terms of greenhouse gas emissions.
  • If all NATO members meet its 2% military spending targets, this would lead to an estimated additional 467 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions.
  • NATO members export arms to 39 of the 40 most climate-vulnerable countries, fuelling conflict and repression at a dangerous moment of climate breakdown.

NATO’s spending goals have undoubtedly gained momentum as a result of Russia’s full-scale illegal invasion of Ukraine, however even before achieving the 2% target, in 2021 NATO overall spent more than 16 times as much as Russia and its allies in the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO, which includes Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Tajikistan). Russia has increased its military expenditure to a projected $102 billion in 2023, but this would still be less than a twelfth of NATO’s collective expenditure of $1.26 trillion.

The biggest danger of NATO’s 2% military spending goals is that it is encouraging a worldwide arms race. Global military spending in 2022 reached record highs of $2.24 trillion. Our report last year, Climate Collateral, revealed that the richest nations (known as ‘Annex 2’ countries in UN climate negotiations) are spending 30 times as much on military as on climate finance. 

Nnimmo Bassey, former president of Friends of the Earth International and director of the Health of Mother Earth Foundation, Nigeria says in a foreword to the report:

‘Wars kill people, extinguish biodiversity, and destroy the infrastructure that could otherwise provide safeguards in the face of extreme weather events. Warfare is an act of climate denial.’

Co-author of the report, Nick Buxton of Transnational Institute says:

‘This report shows that the climate has tragically become the latest victim in the crossfire of war. We have a closing window of time to address the climate crisis, but the world’s political leaders are more focused on arming themselves to the teeth than prioritising climate action. NATO’s 2% minimum spending goals are adding fuel to the climate fire, diverting much needed resources and increasing greenhouse emissions. We urgently need to de-escalate tensions and find peaceful solutions to conflicts if we are to defend our planet. There is no secure nation on an unsafe planet.’

Contact: Nick Buxton  | +1 530 902 3772 /California |  nick@tni.org | @nickbuxton

Co-authors of the report, Dr Ho-Chih Lin and Deborah Burton of Tipping Point North South say:

‘The military like to portray themselves today as positive climate actors, but they have been the biggest institutional user of fossil fuels. Oil-free fighter jets or electric tanks do not exist and there is nothing realistic on the horizon that will make a meaningful dent in military carbon footprint. Not in our lifetime and certainly not by 2050. The stark reality facing politicians is that to green the military, we need to reduce military spending significantly and this will require a new approach to security, one invested in building diplomacy, peace and climate resilience rather than war.’  

Contact: Deborah Burton  | +44 7779 203455/ UK | deborah@tippingpointnorthsouth.org

Wendela de Vries, a researcher at StopWapenhandel, Dutch Campaign Against the Arms Trade says: ‘High military budgets lead to more emissions, which is not making the world safer. The big winner is the arms industry whose profits are skyrocketing. As the planet reaches a climate tipping point, it is insane that we are investing in making arms dealers even richer, rather than protecting those whose lives are being devastated by climate breakdown

Contact: Wendela de Vries  | +31 (0) 6 506 522 06/Netherlands |   w.de.vries@stopwapenhandel.org  |  @CTWnl

Notes

  1. The full report can be found at https://www.tni.org/climatecrossfire. The executive summary is also available in Spanish, French, Catalan and German.
  2. Total global military expenditure increased by 3.7 per cent in real terms in 2022, to reach a new high of $2240 billion https://www.sipri.org/media/press-release/2023/world-military-expenditure-reaches-new-record-high-european-spending-surges 

Deborah Burton of Tipping Point North South attended COP27 and spoke at a packed UNFCCC side event, Dealing with military and conflict related emissions under the UNFCCC, on 9 November 2022. She hopes to attend COP28 in UAE.

Executive summaries

Publication of the report “NATO, Building Global Insecurity”

On the 25th of June, at the occasion for the Peace Summit Madrid 2022, the Centre Delàs d’Estudis per la Pau, in collaboration with the International Peace Bureau (IPB) and the Global Campaign on Military Spending (GCOMS), issued its 53th report under the name “NATO, Building Global Insecurity” (La OTAN, Construyendo Inseguridad Global” in the original) with the coordination of Gabriela Serra and contribution of many authors.

This report on the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) presents an updated and detailed reading of military alliances, taking into account the global context of simultaneous crises and the increase of the tensions caused by the invasion of Ukraine at the beginning of 2022.

“NATO’s modus operandi is reflected in its Strategic Concepts, and from the last two approved we can draw some conclusions that help us understand the Alliance’s objectives: on the one hand, it attempts to promote a broad conception of defense, which it makes it possible to greatly expand its scope of action to deal with “new threats”, many of them non-military; There is also an attempt to make submission to the Charter of the United Nations more flexible, situating itself in what has been described as “legal deregulation of war”; Similarly, NATO expands its geographical scope of action beyond what is established by the North Atlantic Treaty, as happened in the case of Afghanistan; Lastly, the democratic deficit with which this strategy is decided, which breaks the most basic rules of parliamentarism, is notable. In June 2021, a new Strategic Concept will be approved in Madrid which, predictably, will focus on reinforcing deterrence and defense, which is equivalent to increasing all military capabilities, whether nuclear, conventional or cyber. It will also include an express reference to the relationship with China, which it considers a “systemic challenge.” In addition, it will state that it will not only respond to armed attacks, but that NATO could intervene militarily against any threat to its security (…)

Therefore, this publication defends the “No to war, no to NATO”, as an amendment to the whole, to a predatory militarism of lives and human resources, of habitats, of economies. peace is not only a hackneyed slogan, but a relationship policy that must be deployed at all levels, from the interpersonal to the interstate, now more than ever”

At the adjunct (annex), from pages 47 to 49, you can find the contribution of Reiner Braun – Executive Director of the International Peace Bureau (IPB) – addressing the Olof Palme Report “Common Security 2022: For our Shared Future”, focusing on how Common Security serves to avoid disasters regarding nuclear armament and militarization. The Common Security report aims to encourage that “in times of acute crisis, there must be those who look forward and give a vision of a better future”, complementing in many ways the words of Centre Delàs’ report.

Click in this link to have access to the full report or visit Centre Delàs’ website.­­

The IPB & Peacemomo Launch New Brochure: 11 Things We Should Consider about Global Military Spending

On the occasion of the 2021 Global Day of Action for Military Spending,
the International Peace Bureau and PEACEMOMO present a few interesting questions and possible responses around Global Military Spending.

The brochure “11 Things We Should Consider about Global Military Spending” is a guide for educators dedicated to peace in order to address questions around climate change and common security challenges.

This booklet is a didactic tool for people who wants to understand the implications of the military as a threat to peace.

You can download the brochure directly here.

The culture of peace – a necessary utopia?

by Ingeborg Breines

Summary

The notion and the vision of a culture of peace was developed by UNESCO, the UN Organization for Education, Culture and Science, in cooperation with a huge number of individuals, organisations and institutions over the ten years leading up to the year 2000, the International Year for a Culture of Peace. Continue reading “The culture of peace – a necessary utopia?”

Selected elements of a treaty prohibiting nuclear weapons

New York, 27 March 2017

In this paper, the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms (IALANA) discusses selected proposed elements of a treaty prohibiting nuclear weapons, leading to their total elimination, to be negotiated this year. The elements discussed are ones of special concern to IALANA; we have made no effort to provide a comprehensive catalogue, and there are many important elements not discussed here. IALANA draws in particular on our experience, with colleagues from other organizations, in the drafting of the Model Nuclear Weapons Convention.

Click here to see article!

Human Security Post 2015 NPT Review Conference

Geneva. 19 June 2015.

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is widely considered to be a cornerstone of international security. As is well known, in May 2015, its 191 states party failed to agree on an outcome at their five-yearly Review Conference in New York; in addition, the Iranian nuclear talks are at a critical juncture. In order to face these challenges, and others arising worldwide (such as ISIS-ISIL, Ukraine, Syria, cyber attacks,…) the international community has to find new ways to resolve dangerous conflicts.

Click here to see article!