How increasing global military expenditure threatens SDG 13 on Climate action

The global increase in military expenditure has far reaching consequences, negatively impacting multiple of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This submission will focus solely on the implications for SDG 13: Climate action, as this is the expertise of the authors, but we wish to stress that this is simply one of many SDGs that are at risk due to rising military expenditure.

The world has now marked a decade of rising military spending, with the global total now standing at a record breaking $2.7 trillion annually. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine prompted a dramatic increase in European Union (EU) military spending, and between 2021 and 2024, EU member states’ total military expenditure rose by more than 30%. In 2024, it reached an estimated €326 billion – about 1.9% of EU GDP, almost reaching the NATO target of 2% which is set to rise.

Whilst this submission will focus on the current ‘rearmament’ efforts being led by EU and NATO states, it is important to place this in the context of military spending over time. Some of the world’s largest militaries have been dedicating these levels of spending, and more, for decades. Since records began in 1948, the United States has never spent less than 3% of its GDP on its military; in 2023, the annual total stood at $916 billion. Similarly, Russia has only dropped below 3% once since the fall of the Soviet Union (earlier data is not available), reaching an estimated $145.9 billion in 2024. Chinese military expenditure has been rapidly increasing for the last 20 years and while it may appear that China spends less than 2% of GDP on its military, it is suggested that this is an incomplete picture and the true share is likely higher. Global superpowers have been normalising spending a higher share of GDP on military budgets for far longer than this current period of ‘rearmament’.

Militaries are huge energy users whose greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) make a significant contribution to the climate crisis. However, countries do not systematically record and report their military emissions so the real share of this source of emissions remains unclear. The Conflict and Environment Observatory (CEOBS) and Scientists for Global Responsibility estimate that everyday military activity could be responsible for around 5.5% of global emissions, meaning that if the world’s militaries were a country, they would be the fourth largest emitter in the world. Furthermore, as military spending increases and the rest of society decarbonises, that proportion is set to rise.

Fundamentally, increasing military spending will increase military emissions. Ramping up military production to increase stockpiles is energy-intensive and, while technological advances in lower carbon military technologies remain limited, the current procurement push together with the reliance on older and allegedly more known and thus trusted technologies means that militaries will be locked into fossil-fuel intensive equipment to be used for decades to come. A recent report from the European Defence Agency noted the lack of standardised ‘green’ procurement across EU militaries, with less than 40% of respondents reporting a ‘green’ procurement policy in place; noting that ‘green’ does not necessarily equate to low-carbon in this context. However, it has been found that military expenditure contributes to a rise in emissions even when technological progress with the military sector is taken into account, contributing to the so-called treadmill of destruction effect where the general dynamics of militarisation can harm the environment outside of direct impacts.