Military spending in Europe is growing by 17%, almost double the global average.

BarcelonaThe world is rearming. In 2024, global military spending reached $2.7 trillion, 9.4% more than the previous year and the highest level ever recorded. This is the tenth consecutive year of increase and now represents 2.5% of global GDP, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), one of the world's most renowned centers for weapons studies. "This is an absolute record since the Second World War," summarizes Ian Davis, executive coordinator of the SIPRI yearbook. "Europe and NATO are leading this increase, which is leading us into a new era of permanent insecurity," Davis warns in an interview with ARA.

The SIPRI 2025 Yearbook, which was presented this Tuesday in Barcelona with the Catalan edition of Fundipau, points out that the increase in spending is concentrated mainly in Europe, with 17% more, and also in the Middle East, driven by the wars in Ukraine and Gaza and by the growing perception of threat. And in the next decade, NATO allies expectraise its military investment to 5% of GDP, in a historic shift that, according to Davis, "is going to have very serious economic, social, and environmental consequences."

The normalization of war

The yearbook notes that in 2024 there were 49 states involved in armed conflicts, with at least 239,000 deaths, 25% more than the previous year. "The number of wars hasn't grown much, but their intensity has. Perhaps the most novel thing is their internationalization," Davis explains. "Almost all current conflicts have external actors involved, which makes them longer and bloodier."

The bloodiest wars last year were those in Ukraine, Gaza, Sudan, Myanmar, and Ethiopia. In all of them, the civilian population is the main victim. "Wars have become more urban and brutal," Davis laments. "Weapons supposedly smart The number of victims is increasing, including among the civilian population. Technology doesn't make wars cleaner, but rather more efficient at destroying.

The new nuclear race

By early 2025, there were 12,241 nuclear weapons in the world. Of these, 9,614 are part of active military inventories, 3,912 are deployed, and 2,100 are on high alert. "Since the mid-1980s, the number of nuclear warheads had been reduced by 75%, but this trend has stopped," Davis warns. "Now the pace of dismantling is slowing and the pace of production is increasing: we are on the verge of a new nuclear race."

The coordinator of the SIPRI yearbook warns that all nine states with nuclear weapons—from the United States to North Korea—are modernizing their arsenals and incorporate artificial intelligence into command systems"There is less and less human control over potentially irreversible decisions. It's a much more volatile scenario than the Cold War." The risk of an accident or miscalculation skyrockets as the importance of algorithms grows, even in warfare.

Arms control crisis and disarmament setbacks

The yearbook denounces the collapse of international arms control mechanisms. The last major bilateral agreement -New START between Washington and Moscow to curb the proliferation of nuclear missiles intercontinental ballistic missiles—expires in March 2026. "The Russians have left the door open to extending it for another year, but there is no political will to negotiate a new framework," Davis admits.

There are also setbacks in conventional weapons. In 2024, Lithuania withdrew from the cluster munitions treaty, and five other states—including Ukraine, Poland, Finland, Latvia, and Estonia—have announced they will withdraw from the landmine treaty. "This is the first time we've seen withdrawals from these humanitarian conventions. This marks a dangerous turning point," Davis warns.

The economic, social, and environmental costs

Davis emphasizes that militarization not only threatens peace, but also economic and social progress. "Every billion dollars invested in defense generates about 11,000 jobs, but the same amount invested in education would generate 27,000. Military spending diverts resources from health, education, and the ecological transition," he says.

SIPRI estimates that militaries are responsible for between 3.5% and 7% of global greenhouse gas emissions. "The military sector is one of the few that is not required to declare its climate impact," Davis points out. "If defense budgets double between now and 2035, military emissions will also double, neutralizing any global effort to combat climate change."

New War Technologies

The yearbook devotes a large section to emerging technologies—artificial intelligence, cyberweapons, the militarization of space, and autonomous drones—that are transforming the nature of conflict. "This new technological race escapes any regulation and makes it much more difficult to control risks," notes Davis. "We are creating weapons systems capable of making decisions on their own, and this is deeply disturbing."

The yearbook also analyzes how the world is once again dividing into blocs. NATO accounts for 55% of global military spending, while China and Russia are strengthening their strategic and technological ties. "It's a reflection of a zero-sum mentality," explains Davis. "The more one blog rearms, the more the other feels threatened. It's the same logic that led us to the Cold War."

Toward Shared Security

Given this outlook, Davis argues that there is still room for diplomacy and disarmament. "We must recover the concept of common security from the 1980s: cooperate before competing, dialogue before deterring. There will be no peace as long as states compete to see who can destroy each other the fastest," he declares.

SIPRI advocates for a new multilateralism led by medium-sized and small states, capable of promoting concrete agreements. "The big players will not lead the change: they are too trapped in their own logic of power. It is necessary for others to force an agenda of transparency, arms control, and diplomacy."

Davis concludes with a clear warning: "If we want more security, we must ensure that our neighbors do not feel threatened either. Security is only real when it is shared. And that requires more dialogue, more equality, and fewer weapons."