After the end of the Cold World, the trend in military strategy and national security agenda has been changed all over the world from high politics which emphasized issues of war, nuclear deterrence to low politics which emphasized the environment, economic development and natural resources. Despite of this global trend, the Burmese Regime in Burma increased military spending for land warfare, sea power and air power while other countries were trying to reduce. This essay will analyze the rise of military balance and its consequences. 

According to the data of the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), Burma military balance in 1987 and 2002 can be compared as 

 

1987

2002

Total armed forces

186,000 (personnel)

444,000(personnel)

army

8 Regional commands

12 Regional Commands

Navy (patrols)

36

61

Air Force

20 combat,

no armed hel.

113 combat,

29 armed hel.

 So it is obvious that the defense sector of Burma has increased since 1988. Indeed, there are a variety of goals which countries try to increase the military power as an instrument. Payne categorized as

  • To prevent an invader from seizing one’s territory
  • To prevent an invader from taking away a part of one’s territory
  • To take away part of the territory of another country
  • To conquer another country (Payne, 1989:61)

In the case of Burma, there has not been an invader or a threat to invader since 1988. So the rise of military power in Burma can be assumed as a threat to its neighbor countries. 

Moreover, the prisoner’s dilemma can be used to analyze for arms racing between two countries.  

 

Country B builds

More weapons

Country B doesn’t

Build weapons

Country A builds more

weapons

ARMS RACE

Country A attains

Military superiority

Country A doesn’t build

weapons

Country B attains

Military superiority

NO ARMS RACE

  By using this simulation, I then looked at the military balance of the neighboring countries of Burma as follows by comparing the total armed forces. 

 

1987

2002

Thailand

756,000

306,000

Laos

55,500

29,100

India

1462,000

1298,000

Bangladesh

131,500

137,000

Burma

186,000

444,000

 The above figures clearly show that only Burma has increased military power and arms racing compared to its neighbor countries. Other countries reduced or remained similar figures. According to the prisoner dilemma as shown above, we can conclude that Burma has become a threat to the security of other countries.

Nevertheless, increasing the military power also means increasing the military spending. There are a lot of social and economic consequences of military spending as Sivard claimed _

“Third World defense budgets have increased sixfold, but half of the population in those countries did not have safe water to drink”        (Sivard, 1987:3)

“In developing countries as many as twenty percent of children borne die before their fifth birthday; yet those countries spend almost four times as much on arms as they do on health care”      (Sivard, 1987:6) 

It is clear that the social welfare system can not be effective by buying more guns and the defense budget can have a serious effect to the economic development of a nation.  

In addition, the current military regime used the word ‘security’ several times for its arms racing. If security is defined in a broader sense, it is the expectation that one will live in a full life, not one sitting on the guns. Security cannot be purchased by the high rates of military spending only. There are a lot of other social indicators for the security concept, for example, if the spending for arms goes up, so do poverty, diseases and suffering (Kegley, 1988:359) Poverty and military spending are closely linked as a positive correlation. 

The following figure shows the defense economic data of Burma during it high rates of military balance period. 

 

1986

2002

Debt (US $)

4.2 billion

5.6 billion

Defense budget (US$)

252.56 million

555 million

$1=K

7.1271

850 (not 8.5)

 In conclusion, the high rates of military balance in Burma and its increasing budgets have caused a lot of social and economic consequences in Burma as well as a threat to international community as a whole. 

Khin Ma Ma Myo 

References 

IISS, The Military Balance, 1987-1988 

IISS, The Military Balance, 2002-2003 

Writz, J. (2002) “A New Agenda for Security and Strategy”, in Writz,J., Baylis, J. & Gray, C. Strategy in a contemporary World: An Introduction to Strategic Studies, Oxford University Press, Oxford 

Sandler, T & Hartley, K. (1995) The Economics of Defense, Cambridge surveys of economic literature, Cambridge 

Payne, S. (1988) The Conduct of War, Basil Blackwell.

Sivard, R. (1987) World Military and Social Expenditures, Washington D.C