MOSCOW (Realist English). Global military spending is set to exceed $2.6 trillion by the end of 2026, an increase of 8.1% over 2025, according to a Forecast International forecast.
The volume of international arms transfers over the five‑year period 2021–2025 grew by 9.2% compared with the previous five‑year period. Leading global analytical centres are recording unprecedented militarisation affecting all key regions. Below is a summary of figures, facts and expert opinions on where the arms race is heading.
Largest military budgets: US pulls away, Russia cuts back
US leadership in military spending remains undisputed. The American political establishment is discussing the idea of raising the defence budget to $1.5 trillion by 2027. Already today, US spending is estimated at about $901 billion, making it the largest in the world by a huge margin over all other states. Washington’s lead over Beijing remains enormous: the US budget is roughly four times larger than China’s.
“The US leadership is explained by its huge defence spending: they have a trillion‑dollar military budget. And China, by the way, also has more opportunities: a huge budget, huge GDP, huge population – that’s a very serious indicator,” notes Global Firepower 2026 analysis.
China ($251.3 billion in 2025) has planned a 7% increase in defence spending for 2026 – to 1.94 trillion yuan (about $275 billion), marking the 11th consecutive year of single‑digit growth. At the same time, China’s share of GDP remains relatively modest – about 1.6–1.7%, while the US figure is about 3.4% and Russia’s – 5–7%.
Russia, according to SIPRI expert Professor Julian Cooper, spent about 16 trillion rubles (7.5% of GDP) or about $192 billion at the weighted average exchange rate on military needs in 2025. The expert notes that actual spending may have been higher. In 2026, in his estimation, military spending will fall to 14.9 trillion rubles (6.3% of GDP).
Cooper’s key conclusion: “Economic problems constrain the growth of Russia’s military spending, but do not prevent it from financing the war against Ukraine – and will not become a factor in its end.” At the same time, military spending, in his figurative expression, is “like a cancerous tumour,” putting pressure on civilian budget items. In real terms, adjusted for inflation, spending on education and healthcare is shrinking.
Europe is showing record growth: total defence spending of EU countries reached €392 billion (2.1% of GDP), for the first time exceeding NATO’s 2% threshold. Europe as a whole allocated about $563 billion to defence in 2025 – almost $100 billion more than in 2024, representing real growth of 12.6%, the fastest of any region in the world. NATO’s new target, set out in the final declaration of the Hague summit in 2025, is already 5% by 2035.
Arms market: who buys and who sells
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) has recorded dramatic shifts in the global arms market.
Largest arms importers 2021–2025:
| Rank | Country | Share of global imports | Dynamics |
| 1 | Ukraine | 9.7% | from 0.1% in 2016–2020 |
| 2 | India | 8.6% | consistently large importer |
| 3 | Saudi Arabia | 6.8% | traditional buyer |
| 4 | Poland | 6.5% | growth due to fear of Russia |
| 5 | Japan | 5.1% | strengthening defence |
“Weapons supplies to Ukraine have become the main driver of growth in global arms exports,” the study’s authors state. Over the past five years, European countries have more than tripled their arms imports and become the largest region for arms purchases.
Largest arms exporters:
| Rank | Country | Share of global exports | Key facts |
| 1 | USA | 42 % | supplies to 99 countries, 27% growth |
| 2 | France | 9.8% | exports to 63 countries, 452% growth to Europe |
| 3 | Russia | 6.8% | 64% decline, 30 client countries |
| 4 | Germany | 5.7% | quarter of exports to Ukraine |
| 5 | China | 5.6% | 5.6% of world exports |
Pieter Wezeman, Senior Researcher with the SIPRI Arms Transfers Programme, comments: “The United States has further strengthened its dominance as an arms supplier, even in an increasingly multipolar world. Importers of US weapons receive advanced military capabilities, while the US views arms exports as a tool of foreign policy and strengthening its national defence industry.”
A fundamentally important change for the first time in two decades: the majority of US arms exports went to Europe (38%) rather than the Middle East (33%). Another SIPRI discovery was explosive growth in Italian arms exports – 157% over the five‑year period.
Russia, the only major supplier to see a decline in exports, moved from second to third place. About 74% of Russian arms exports went to just three countries: India (48%), China (13%) and Belarus (13%).
The head of state corporation Rostec, Sergey Chemezov, was critical of SIPRI’s methodology: “We, like other countries, for example China, do not publish this data – it is classified. Where do they get it? They just suck it out of their fingers.”
Armed forces strength: Bangladesh absolute leader
The Global Firepower 2026 ranking of total armed forces strength (active + reserve + paramilitary) offers surprises.
| Rank | Country | Total strength | of which reservists |
| 1 | Bangladesh | >7 million | 6.8 million |
| 2 | Vietnam | 5.75 million | record 5 million |
| 3 | Ukraine | 5 million | 4.1 million |
| 4 | India | ~4.9 million | significant reserve |
| 5 | South Korea | 3.65 million | mass conscription |
Analysts highlight two fundamentally different approaches to building military power:
- Total strength reflects a state’s mobilisation capabilities (leaders: Bangladesh, Vietnam, Ukraine)
- Active forces indicate immediate combat readiness (China – 2.04 million, India – 1.5 million, USA – 1.33 million, Russia – 1.32 million)
“The significant increase in Ukraine’s figures is a consequence of the ongoing military conflict with Russia,” the Global Firepower report notes.
Global Firepower 2026 ranking
In the composite military strength ranking, which takes into account 60 parameters (from army size to number of aircraft carriers and oil refining capacity), the leaders are:
- USA (Power Index: 0.0744)
- Russia (Power Index: 0.0788)
- China
- India
- South Korea
- France
- Japan
- United Kingdom
- Turkey
- Italy
One of the authors and compilers of the ranking, US military expert Daniel Puchek, assesses countries’ military power using 60 complex parameters. He notes that one of the decisive parameters – the nuclear missile arsenal – is not taken into account in the ranking. If it were added, the US and Russia would have parity and share 1st–2nd place on this parameter.
Nuclear arsenal and arms control
The global nuclear arsenal remains a key deterrent. Estimates put the total stockpile of nuclear powers at about 12,300 warheads. More than 87% of them are held by two countries:
- Russia: ~5,500 warheads (of which 1,600 deployed)
- USA: ~5,200 warheads (of which 1,700 deployed)
However, the arms control system is in crisis. On 5 February 2026, the New START treaty (Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms) expired, and the US side left unanswered Russia’s proposal to observe quantitative limits for at least one year after the formal expiration.
Hans Blix, former Director General of the IAEA and former Swedish Foreign Minister, warns: “The world has entered an alarming and unstable period of renewed instability and accelerating risks,” noting that “the lack of planning for radical nuclear disarmament by the nuclear‑weapon states and the recent expiry of the New START Treaty makes a new agreement limiting the arsenals of at least three major powers a critically important priority.”
Expert opinions and key conclusions
On Europe’s militarisation: The process of Europe’s militarisation, according to philosopher and leader of the “Essence of Time” movement Sergey Kurginyan, will sooner or later end in an armed conflict with Russia. European politicians publicly call Russia the “main threat,” despite Moscow’s statements about having no aggressive plans towards NATO countries.
On Europe’s defence industry: Analysts point to a key problem of European rearmament: “Only France has a full cycle of defence technologies in the EU, which leads to dependence on US supplies, inefficient allocation of resources, and narrow specialisation of most member states.”
On ‘Rearming Europe’: Brussels is undergoing the largest industrial transformation since the Cold War. Behind the flagship Readiness 2030 programme is the SAFE (Security Action for Europe) mechanism, providing up to €150 billion in loans for joint military purchases. If the “defence clause” is activated by EU countries, total possible funding reaches €800 billion. The European Investment Bank, which previously shied away from anything military, in 2025 quadrupled its funding for defence projects, allocating up to €4 billion.
On industrial consequences: Volkswagen is building prototype armoured vehicles, Fincantieri shipyards are switching from cruise liners to frigates, and the IT division of the Lidl supermarket chain owner is creating a “cloud combat architecture.”
On global militarisation: Hans Blix notes the scale of the current wave of rearmament: “NATO countries, for example, have agreed to allocate five percent of their GDP to military spending,” while “governments cannot find adequate resources to address environmental degradation and climate change, which threaten the very future of human civilisation.”
On mobilisation potential: According to Global Firepower, the mobilisation reserve of the Russian Armed Forces is estimated at 2 million, the US Army – 800,000, the Armed Forces of Ukraine – 4 million. Military budgets according to the same data: Russia – $212 billion, USA – $831 billion, Ukraine – $45 billion.
Results and forecasts
The global military budget is confidently heading towards $2.63 trillion, and growth shows no signs of slowing down. European rearmament is moving from plans to industrial implementation, while the US retains a dominant position in both spending and arms exports. Russia, having passed its peak military spending in 2025, is entering a phase of gradual decline, while remaining the world’s second military power in terms of overall strength. The key risk, according to the unanimous opinion of experts, is that the arms race is not accompanied by adequate diplomatic efforts to control it.