This video ranks the top 15 countries in the world by military spending per year from 1830 to 2022. Spending is calculated in US dollars and is not adjusted for inflation. * * * Source: ourworldindata, SIPRI Music: Hearts of Iron IV
1833-1840 Carlist War 1839-1842 First Opium War 1846-1848 Mexican-American War 1853-1856 Crimean War 1861-1865 American Civil War 1866 Austro-Prussian War 1870-1871 Franco-Prussian War 1877-1878 Russo-Turkish War 1898-1899 Spanish-American War 1904-1905 Russo-Japanese War 1910-1919 Mexican Border War 1912-1913 Balkan Wars 1914-1918 World War I 1917-1922 Russian Civil War 1927-1949 Chinese Civil War 1937-1945 Second Sino-Japanese War 1939-1945 World War II 1947-1991 Cold War 1950-1953 Korean War 1955-1975 Vietnam War 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War 1990-1991 Gulf War 2003-2011 Iraq War 2001-Present War on Terror 2022-2023 Russo-Ukrainian War
The Soviet Union spending $300 billion on defense in 1985 is insane. As a % of GDP, that's like USA or China spending $3.5 trillion on defense in 2023.
One of the major reasons they bankrupted themselves while their people lived in 1 room apartments with a communal bathroom and stood in line each day for stale bread.
@@pumaa8416 if the USSR was so good why do majority of the eastern bloc never want to go back and tell me who ran to what side of Berlin when the wall fell?
@@pumaa8416You’re lying to yourself. My house is made of hardie board, stucko and rebar. My roof is secured to the foundation. Every new home in my area has to be made up to a certain code set by the county. Houses around the country vary greatly. If the USSR was so great why did it collapse? Just face it, your military spent more than it should have on a futile effort and we saw the results of that in 1991. Of course that’s not the only reason the USSR collapsed.
These dynamic graphs are much more useful when you note major events within the video. For example starting in 1859 the US undergoes a meteoric rise then plumets after 1866. It's due to the Civil War of course, but many of the dramatic changes aren't so obvious - at least to me.
@@losarpettystrakos7687 Yes, it was in crisis in mid-80s. But you don't know communists. They will never decrease spending on the army unless something serious happens. And this serious was Chornobyl. Total loss from this catastrophe is more than 250 bln usd in today's money
@@oskich7758 Because it didn't exist during war (it was occupied by Soviet Union and Germany) so after it was brought back it was spending huge portion of GDP on military. Which is interesting considering that it wasn't a totally free country for over 200 years
First of all, I love that the HoI3/4 soundtrack is used. Secondly, ridiculous how well it fits dynamically with the graphs?!? Third, as a history nerd, this is simply the best
@@Joebinlaggin513 There was no Kingdom of France in 1853 or 1870, youre ignorant. It was the Second Empire held by Napoleon III, a totally different thing.
@@bunkerkorpf1440 French empire would be more correct since Napoleon III was an emperor, not a king. Napoleon III choose the title of emperor over king because "King" (or "Roi" in French) has been a very unpopular title ever since the French Revolution, but otherwise was a bog-standard monarchy of the time. Simply leaving the country as France (outside of the Vichy regime) would have avoided this and would technically been correct, too.
It's interesting to note that Soviet military spending surpassed the United States in 1969, and remained significantly higher throughout the 1970s. The Carter and Reagan military build-ups are noticeable in the late 1970s and into the 1980s. Excellent graphs, thank you for posting this!
@@Ravie3Nonsense, they fell due to political pressure, not economical. Stop this misinformation.. By your logic North Korea should have fallen a long time ago. Soviet citizen definitely had it better than North Korean have it now. Even starving Ukrainians had it better.
@@foreignfat6009 I wonder what could have possibly contributed to the large amount of political pressure placed on the soviet regime... Definitely not anything to do with the appalling economic conditions most of the soviet citizenry found themselves in.
@@GareBear420 Maybe ridiculous amount of ethnicity and different religion? And different cultures, which were suppressed. You are forgetting that Soviet Union was union of mostly poor countries. Russia was pretty much the richest and that doesn't say much after WW1, civil wars and ww2. It was impressive what they did with a poor ruin. Again, North Korea has worse conditions for their people than most Soviet union and it didn't collapse out of economic pressure. And they won't. They need military coup or outside intervention to collapse. They don't have to deal with so much diversity. If USA swapped places geographically, they wouldn't be a superpower. USA had huge economic issues, and it didn't collapse. USA had way less diversity than Soviet union.
France was the strongest land army in Europe for hundred of years. They catch a lot of flak for surrendering during WW2 but they lost 92,000 troops in a matter of months and were just over run.
@@user-hz2eh3iq1f True, but lack of good Soviet commanders at the start didn’t help. Stalin purged all the good officers because he was a paranoid maniac. But as an American I do understand the great sacrifice the Soviets undertook…With huge amounts of American food and equipment to help.
The brief appearance of what should be the Irish Free State (instead of the Republic of Ireland, a term that wasn't used until 1948) on this chart says something about how absurdly expensive the civil war was.
@@johnwayne7673 Can't imagine the price of a pint back in the 50s or 60s cost more, course getting the money for it would be tough. How much was it do you remember?
There are inaccuracies, the Ottoman Empire is it the most obvious one and another one is Austria-Hungary which more commonly used the black and gold flag Habsburg flag. It's still a lot better than other videos which just use modern flags and names though.
Japan's Flag during it's empire is inaccurate. The flag shown there is the Imperial Japanese Army and Navy flags. It is still used today. The corrrect flag is the same flag as modern Japan.
In 1856, there is no French kingdom, we were ruled by Napoleon III, the Second Empire, after Napoleon was elected as the first French president democratically elected, he declared the empire one year later.
@@user-ct9sj3rh8p Гитлер НЕ пришел к власти на демократических выборах. Он получил место рейхсканцлера благодаря коррупционному скандалу, связанным с сука-сыночкой Гинденбурга, а партия НСДАП не получила большинства мест в парламенте, чтобы принимать решения без оглядки на другие партии. НСДАП вместо демократических процедур просто убивали депутатов других партий, ввели антиконституционный запрет на коммунистическую партию, и ввели антиконституционные законы, ограничивающие права и свободы граждан. НСДАП и Гитлер сломали демократические институты, они к своей абсолютной власти на выборах НЕ приходили - они власть ЗАХВАТИЛИ. Формально во время ВМВ у Германского рейха была конституция, гарантирующая права и свободы граждан, но НСДАП просто ее игнорировали.
We just weren't dick swinging for the moon cuz we weren't being pressed. Don't F with America, you watch what happens in any world war when America joins
@Terror do Ocidente old weapons, tech is always improving and R&D innovation is why countries who stop spending fall way behind on the global scale. Seems like USA decided to conquer the planet in like 1988 and juiced the spending to like $275 billion a year and it never went down after that just straight climbed to almost a trillion dollars from then till now.
@@ltmammaguerillz6745 The Americans realized that even though they were the number 1 power, they still weren't able to defeat half of a country that was fighting with Russian AK 47 rifles, wearing slippers, and a "drum cymbal" on their head. After the embarrassment, they started to invest madly in their armed forces, not only to displace Socialist Russia, but also to not make the same mistakes!
@@doncomuna378 Losing the political will to fight is not same as an outright military defeat. America decided it was worth keeping Japan, S.Korea and Western Europe after WW2, so we stayed. America decided it wasn't worth keeping Vietnam, Afghanistan or Iraq, so we left.
Would also be interesting to see this adjusted with PPP. In US dollars alone it doesn't give a true representation of military expenditure. China and Russia's for example is likely at least double when you consider PPP.
I totally agree, but Purchasing Power Parity is calculated using consumer goods. It doesn't really tell us how much cheaper military equipment, personnel, and research are for other countries vs the US. We would probably need a different metric to properly compare them.
🇺🇸 military spending is equal to money laundering . it hasn't made the us military 10x more powerful than Afghanistan a country thats not even in the top 10
The video is good, but it has a lot of mistakes. One of the big mistakes I've noticed is the hugely inflated country budgets for 1898, which were actually ~3 times lower than shown in the video. Also one of the big mistakes - the Russian military budget for 1994, which could not be equal to 94 billion dollars (which was more than the country's total budget for that year, lmao) and was actually about 13 billion dollars.
Однополярный мир полсе 1991 года , США контролировать начали всю планету в том числе за счёт баз НАТО по всему миру , а на это нужно много средств тратить . Весь мир после 1991 года колония США
one of the difficult questions in history is when specifically the United States became a Great Power and when they became a "Superpower". I usually look at the history of the Civil War and argue that if there was ever a point where the US was considered one of the strongest countries on Earth, then it must be before the Civil War, because the amount mobilized for a *civil war* and not even a war against another major power was insane, and dwarfs a lot of the rest of the world.
France🇫🇷 France🇫🇷France🇫🇷 and France 🇫🇷🤣 At the top of the leaderboard for 90% of the video. This is not surprising for the country that has won the most battles in human history. They have a high military culture and top technology.
This is great and fascinating, is this military or army budget? Certain nations back in the day probably relied much more on their navy (and perhaps later, Air Force)?
The west wanted to help, but the Soviets refuses. That’s also why Poland didn’t get any financial reparations from Germany. The Soviets didn’t allow it.
🇬🇧 The differentiation into the Kingdom of Prussia and Bavaria, the German Empire, the Weimar Republic, Nazi Germany, West and East Germany and since 1990 Germany for the geographical area of Germany reflects the political situation very accurately. In the case of Great Britain, on the other hand, I am simply missing the countries of the British Empire or the Commonwealth. A category NATO or Warsaw Pact would also reflect the historical events of the time more accurately. The same applies to the more than 50 states of the Ukaine Contact Group. In general, I consider the consideration of military expenditures to be much more meaningful than many other explanations for the course of history, so: Thank you for this YT video! 🇩🇪 Die Differenzierung in Königreich Preussen und Bayern, deutsches Kaiserreich, Weimarer Republik, Nazi-Germany, West- und Ost-Deutschland und seit 1990 Deutschland für den geographischen Raum Deutschland gibt die politische Situation sehr exakt wieder. Bei Großbritannien hingegen fehlen mir schlichtweg die Länder des Britischen Empire bzw. des Commonwealth. Eine Kategorie NATO bzw. Warschauer Pakt würde das historische Zeitgeschehen ebenfalls genauer widerspiegeln. Gleiches gilt für die über 50 Staaten der Ukaine-Kontaktgruppe. Die Betrachtung von Militärausgaben halte ich generell für viel aussagekräftiger, als manch andere Erklärung für den Gang der Geschichte, deshalb: Danke für dieses YT-Video!
I think this is just for the UK not the entire British empire. Also the UK has existed since 1801 (apart from a slight name change when most of Ireland left the Union in 1922) so the term "UK" or "United Kingdom" is correct as opposed to Germany which had many names during this time frame
@@Bracus.Reghuskhow does the implementation of new equipment in a single war have to do with their defense budget throughout the past 200 years?? You’re talking about apples when the other dude is talking about oranges 😂
@@roronoazoro2970 The use of new equipment come the implementation of new strategies and organisation just study This is a fascinating subject, and it shows that the French army has been at the forefront of innovation and adaptation, the basic comment is just either bad faith or ignorance.
@@user-ti6xm4rz4fЧестно говоря, вы завидуете, вы ненавидите США только потому, что они номер 1, честно говоря, я мечтаю, чтобы Россия и США заставили Китай и все остальное исчезнуть, а я бразилец, в моей стране полно коммунистов, вот таких ослов , ты знаешь? Они не такие, как Путин, который любит свою страну, люди здесь все разрушают, убивают экономику, у них нет даже хорошего военного планирования, поэтому мне бы очень хотелось быть на стороне России и США, если Если бы Трамп был у власти в США, было бы несколько соглашений, как и у них, и сделали бы больше..
@@davidlucas5550 ,вот честно,никакой зависти к Америке или еще к какой стране вообще нет у россиян,честно-всем пофиг.Пофиг,это когда безразлично,когда ты не думаешь об этом.Америка-международный бандит,страна,которая несет горе и войны по всей планете.Поэтому Америку ненавидит большая половина человечества.Кстати,в России Бразилию любят,у нас есть юмористический фильм"Здравствуйте,я ваша тетя"Там богатая тетушка приехала из Бразилии,где много диких обезьян"😁,и теперь большинство россиян так и думают,что обезьяна-ваше основное животное😁Ну а еще у вас весело,солнечно,Пеле👍
@@user-ti6xm4rz4fсмешно, ну меня не волнуют никакие обиды, честно говоря, мне кажется, что это смешно, но это правда чувак, к сожалению ничего хорошего отсюда не выходит, умные те, кто отсюда выходят.
just a detail but from 1852 to 1870 France was named "Second Empire" and not "Kingdom" anymore (even if the Second Empire is considered as a parliamentary monarchy)
@@AlexKoso потому что самые светлые мозги рождаются именно в России. Например, пенициллин в США был изобретён раньше, но стоил дороже, чем впоследствии разработка пенициллина в СССР. И так - по всей остальной продукции. То же самое и сейчас - все виды нашего вооружения намного дешевле, чем во всех других странах мира. Что свидетельствует об уникальности человеческого материала в нашей самой лучшей на планете стране.
@@sohenmondal5471 here comes another indian nationalist who thinks everybody with different opinion is a sepoy. Bruh seriously when will you guys grow up??
@@vatsal7640 India back in the 19th century was divided into several kingdoms and hence it was easy to conquer fragmented kingdoms one by one which is what Brits did. Had India been unified then it would never had been directly colonized. India's situation would have been something like China in the 'Century of Humiliation'
Меня это тоже удивило, если место Чехословакии можно объяснить, у неё и так была сильная военная промышленность ещё до вм2 то, как ГДР мог столько тратить, наверно деньги советы довели.
@@MBGA123 Well, the problem is, you don't need a 700 billion+ investment into military to protect your nation. Unless you consider invading other countries for their resources as "protecting our people"
США тратит миллионы долларов чтобы создать ручку которая пишет в космосе, а Россия тратит 10центов,и берет с собой обычный карандаш, вот и разница в расходах
Сейчас сюда придёт какой-нибудь умник и напишет об грифеле от карандаша(что он опасен в условиях невесомости и ограниченной влажности)... Карандаши на космических станциях СССР были - восковые. Правда космическую ручку СССР всё-таки купил у США. Восковые карандаши пишут очень уж размыто.
We got infinite money baby, our money are propped up by our military and other countries rely on it. If they don't want our defense well they are in trouble.
Well the industries that make military supplies can be pretty advanced and cannot be scaled quickly, so the days of sudden military spending seem to be over, now you need a standing military big enough to support advanced industry. And rely on stock piles of weapons.
1848 Revolutionary movement in Austria and Germany, 1853 War in Crimean peninsula, 1871 French-Prussian war, 1877 Russo-Turkish war, 1905 Russo-Japanese war
Poland spends a lot of money on the army. The problem is that it is in a bad situation, because its main historical enemies (Russia and Germany) usually spend more.
Things I'm taking from this 1. Biggest USA export is war 2. Yugoslavia at one point had 7th largest military budget. No wonder west did everything it could to get rid of balkan super power. 3. Czechoslovakia, same as Yugoslavia. West doesn't like Slavic superpowers
СССР после разрушительной войны на его территории; догнал США, которые на войне заработали большие деньги, получили огромное количество талантливых учёных со всего мира и стали огромнейшей силой. Уважение Сталину и всем кто участвовал в восстановлении огромной страны-победительницы.
@@Zornyiага, настолько хуже что пробабушка хочет вернуться во времена 60 годов(вплоть до 85) до сих пор у них москвич стоит подаренный государством в отличии от пендосии где бедность достигает огромных цифр. В москве такого нет сколько в нью йорке или вашингтоне. Не было. Капиталистам этого не понять, вы только о деньгах думаете. А щас стране победительнице памятники сносят, и строят музеи о том какой сталин был тиран как в Польше, или же нарния, кхм украина, где герб ссср снесли со статуи и поставили бандеровский трезубец. Справедливость. Ага. Траты им млять.
@@Zornyi Жил хуже, чем кто? Советские люди помнили, что сделали европейцы в СССР, поэтому вкладывались в оборону. Мы сегодня видим, западный гражданин после начала спец операции уже знал, кто враг, а многие Россиянине до сих пор живут в илюзиях.
Someone needs to tell the US that the Cold War ended a couple decades ago. And you still get people in there saying they need to put more money into army?! It’s insane!
I'm curious. Even the Qing Dynasty itself didn't know how much its military expenditure was. Where did you hear that? Did the emperor tell you this personally when you traveled back in time to 1830?
While I do not know the exact answer for Qing Dynasty case, but most of "spending" cases in history were taken from the book records from trading guilds. They always have a very good record about what when and how much was sold. And they've been keeping their ledgers for centuries. Similarly, some of the spending can be calculated from the known proportions. Like you've got a record from smith's guild about number of armor suits ordered. You can use this record and a knowledge about typical soldier's gear to estimate the rest of the spendings.
“Our world” = NATO and Russia is still a threat although not as remotely as dangerous as China. We’re still coming off that high of being the worlds sole superpower for almost 80 years.
Canada, the most forgotten world power. World’s 9th largest economy, almost 40 million people, but totally forgotten as a power both now and in the past due to proximity and always being in alliance with the US and UK.
@Ravie3 I live in Canada I knew we had the 5th largest army in ww2 at the end. I just did not realize how powerful we are. On a side note one of indias Carriers was the HMCS Bonaventure.
In modern times? Standing armies is a relatively new thing, before that, countries bankrupted themselves thrice over using mercenaries (and sometimes benefited in the long run)
@@SebHaarfagre except countries were actually expected to pay their debt back, and since their currency was based on the amount of gold they actually had, they couldn't borrow that much when they were bankrupted
build up a big enough army and you ascend past the global economy, because you can simply not pay your bills and they can't take the money from you. They'll actually be paying you to keep to yourself
I'm surprised Canada spent so much in the early 50's. What was that, were they that active in the Korean war (I didn't know they were at all in such case, pardon to any Canadians)
Korean War.. We also still used to field a very large Navy and were very active in supporting NATO with the stationing of several air force squadrons (first F86 Sabres, then Avro CF-100's) and tank brigades in Europe (mainly Centurians) in West Germany) To be honest, we are just a shell of what we once were. EDIT: Canada actually was a major contributor to the Anti-Submarine contingent of NATO in the North Atlantic during the Cold War (both Navy and Maritime Air Patrol) and also maintained 2 aircraft carriers from the 50's through 60's (but retired them both for good in early 70's) And of course there was the setting up of the DEW LINE and the NORAD defensive stations in tandem with the US for the defense of North America against the threat of Soviet bombers over the Arctic Circle.
It is sad to see the state of Canada's military today. Using frigates made in the 80s, with no plans in place to build more. Still not paying their 2% minimum obligation to NATO.
When we talk about keeping statistical data accurate, they counter by saying it's not the case. They point out that some countries have manipulated their numbers or lack real data altogether, and they advocate for recalculations using purchasing power parity or other standards. But here's the thing: even after reevaluating the figures, there are still some folks whose data is double that of everyone else. At that point, they chime in, claiming there's more to the story. They argue that the hefty spending serves the purpose of global harmony. It's like there's always an underlying agenda - a suspicion that this nation aims to destabilize the world. Even if they're not doing so presently, it's about staying ready, just in case. And let's face it, once we edge our defense right up to their doorstep, they'll bare their teeth, revealing their original intentions. Don't Ukraine and Taiwan provide evidence of this very point?
great that we never invaded Russia or CCP China, but can't say the same about Russia and Ukraine. and xi jin ping has been going on and on about invading Taiwan. your intentions of invasion are why there are defense systems at the border
@@Cryosxify So, you're suggesting that only Americans should be armed and the rest of the world should depend on the U.S. for protection. Or, they need the U.S.'s approval to possess what's deemed as armaments by American standards. And the decision to use those weapons has to be greenlit by Americans, too, right? If someone decides to arm themselves, it's assumed they're looking to invade or disrupt peace. That's your view on national defense, isn't it?
It's just that Gorbachev came to power just in 1985 and America bought him, he decided to destroy the Union. Since then, everything has gone downhill. He himself did not begin to live in destroyed Russia, the remnants of the empire that he destroyed, preferred to live and go to another world in Germany. Yeltsin has more conscience and honor, although he began to abuse alcohol, he tried to correct what Gorbachev left him, it was Yeltsin who recommended Putin to the West, for which we thank him!
@@EricChien95 The fact that you're using military bases as a means of saying the numbers for both US and China are accurate is about as accurate as your reading abilities.
Если почитать как японцы пополняли этот бюджет, то жуть берет. Обычные японцы в порыве патриотизма продавали всю нормальную одежду(сами же после этого ходили в дешевых бумажных кимоно для покойников), своих жен и дочерей закладывали в бордели а вырученные с этого средства отдавали на нужды фронта.
The US Civil War seems to only be represented by US spending. This either includes or ignores spending by the rebels, who should have their own bar from 1961-1865. Is the British spike around 1899 due to the Second Boer War? The Soviet budget remains high throughout the 1920s and early 1930s due to conquests and quelling rebellions. The Korean War didn't even show up as a blip. The War on Terror is done, comprising the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Russian invasion of Ukraine is "-Present".
@@Manuel_Fal_Conde: The phrase "special military occupation" was coined for internal political purposes. it's an invasion. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are over, and (despite being lumped into the Global War on Terror basket) only the first few years of Afghanistan were about terrorism - and none of Iraq.
@@pahtar7189 Well. Not to be picky. But there is a reason for calling it a "special military operation". It has to with Russian law and its constitution. Calling it a war requires total mobilization of Russia, with all the problems that is assosiated with that. War economy, rationing, universal draft of able men, turning the whole industry over to war time production etc. That would mean hard times for the economy. Say what you want about Russia, but they are *very particular* about protocol and laws.
@@secularnevrosis: I understand why Putin called it a special military operation, but it has no effect on my post. This video is about military spending and regardless of what term they use, it's an invasion that is ongoing.
What Japan never claimed they don’t have an army. In fact in 2022 Japan stated they are remilitarizing the nation and seeking more U.S technology and aircraft.
