Pakistan, other nuclear states together spent $100 billion on weapons in 2024 — report

Pakistani military personnel stand beside a Shaheen III surface-to-surface ballistic missile during Pakistan Day military parade in Islamabad, Pakistan on March 23, 2019. (REUTERS/File)
Short Url
Updated 13 June 2025
Follow

Pakistan, other nuclear states together spent $100 billion on weapons in 2024 — report

  • US spent $56.8 billion in 2024, followed by China at $12.5 billion, says International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons
  • ICAN says level of nuclear weapons spending in 2024 by these nine nations could have paid UN budget almost 28 times over

GENEVA: Nuclear-armed states spent more than $100 billion on their atomic arsenals last year, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons said Friday, lamenting the lack of democratic oversight of such spending.

ICAN said Britain, China, France, India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia and the United States together spent nearly $10 billion more than in 2023.

The United States spent $56.8 billion in 2024, followed by China at $12.5 billion and Britain at $10.4 billion, ICAN said in its flagship annual report.

Geneva-based ICAN won the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize for its key role in drafting the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which took effect in 2021.

Some 69 countries have ratified it to date, four more have directly acceded to the treaty and another 25 have signed it, although none of the nuclear weapons states have come on board.

This year’s report looked at the costs incurred by the countries that host other states’ nuclear weapons.

It said such costs are largely unknown to citizens and legislators alike, thereby avoiding democratic scrutiny.

Although not officially confirmed, the report said Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkiye were hosting US nuclear weapons, citing experts.

Meanwhile Russia claims it has nuclear weapons stationed in Belarus, but some experts are unsure, it added.

The report said there was “little public information” about the costs associated with hosting US nuclear weapons in NATO European countries, citing the cost of facility security, nuclear-capable aircraft and preparation to use such weapons.

“Each NATO nuclear-sharing arrangement is governed by secret agreements,” the report said.

“It’s an affront to democracy that citizens and lawmakers are not allowed to know that nuclear weapons from other countries are based on their soil or how much of their taxes is being spent on them,” said the report’s co-author Alicia Sanders-Zakre.

Eight countries openly possess nuclear weapons: the United States, Russia, Britain, France, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea.

Israel is widely assumed to have nuclear weapons, although it has never officially acknowledged this.

ICAN said the level of nuclear weapons spending in 2024 by these nine nations could have paid the UN budget almost 28 times over.

“The problem of nuclear weapons is one that can be solved, and doing so means understanding the vested interests fiercely defending the option for nine countries to indiscriminately murder civilians,” said ICAN’s program coordinator Susi Snyder.

The private sector earned at least $42.5 billion from their nuclear weapons contracts in 2024 alone, the report said.

There are at least $463 billion in ongoing nuclear weapons contracts, some of which do not expire for decades, and last year, at least $20 billion in new nuclear weapon contracts were awarded, it added.

“Many of the companies that benefited from this largesse invested heavily in lobbying governments, spending $128 million on those efforts in the United States and France, the two countries for which data is available,” ICAN said.

Standard nuclear doctrine — developed during the Cold War between superpowers the United States and the Soviet Union — is based on the assumption that such weapons will never have to be used because their impact is so devastating, and because nuclear retaliation would probably bring similar destruction on the original attacker.


Ugandan opposition denounces ‘military state’ ahead of election

Updated 5 sec ago
Follow

Ugandan opposition denounces ‘military state’ ahead of election

KAMPALA: As dark clouds gathered overhead, young and old members of Uganda’s long-embattled opposition gathered for prayers at the home of an imprisoned politician — the mood both defiant and bleak.
The mayor of Kampala, Erias Lukwago, told the gathering on Sunday that this week’s election was a “face off” between ordinary Ugandans and President Yoweri Museveni.
“All of you are in two categories: political prisoners and potential political prisoners,” he said.
Museveni is widely expected to extend his 40-year rule of the east African country in Thursday’s election, thanks to his near-total control of the state and security apparatus.
The 81-year-old came to power as a bush fighter in the 1980s and has maintained a militarised control over the country, brutally cracking down on challengers.
The latest campaign has seen hundreds of opposition supporters arrested and at least one killed, with the police claiming they are confronting “hooligans.”
The main opposition candidate Bobi Wine, real name Robert Kyagulanyi, is rarely seen in public without his flak jacket and has described the campaign as a “war.”
He has been arrested multiple times in the past and tortured in military custody.
The only other significant opposition leader, Kizza Besigye, was kidnapped in Kenya in 2024 and secretly smuggled to a Ugandan military prison to face treason charges in a case that has dragged on for months.
His wife, UNAIDS director Winnie Byanyima, hosted Sunday’s prayer meeting at their home. She said Uganda has only a “thin veneer” of democracy.
“We are really a military state,” she told AFP. “There’s total capture of state institutions by the individual who holds military power, President Museveni.”

Police ‘not neutral’

“The police officers I have met have never looked at themselves as neutral,” said Jude Kagoro, a researcher at the University of Bremen who has spent more than a decade studying African police.
Most officers view it as their duty to support the incumbent power, he said, and often require no explicit order to use brute force on opposition rallies.
Museveni’s regime has used many strategies to infiltrate and divide opposition groups, including through handouts to different ethnic groups.
Under a system informally known as “ghetto structures,” security officials recruit young people in opposition areas who “work for the police to disorganize opposition activities, and also to spy,” said Kagoro.
The government was taken by surprise when Wine burst on to the political scene ahead of the 2021 election, becoming the voice of the urban youth, and responded with extreme violence.
Similarly, Tanzania’s authoritarian government was caught unawares when protests broke out over rigging in last October’s election, and security forces responded by killing hundreds.
The Ugandan government is better prepared now.
“For the last four-plus years, they have been building an infrastructure that can withstand any sort of pressure from the opposition,” said Kagoro.
“We are used to the military and the police on the streets during elections.”

‘Too dangerous’

Still, the authorities are not taking any chances. Citizens are being told to vote and return home immediately.
“The regime wants to make people very scared so they don’t come out to vote,” said David Lewis Rubongoya, secretary-general of Wine’s National Unity Platform.
There has been a spate of arrests and abductions targeting the opposition — a tactic also increasingly used in neighboring Kenya and Tanzania — with rights groups accusing the east African governments of coordinating their repression.
The violence makes it hard for opposition groups to organize.
“The price people have to pay for engaging in political opposition has become very high,” said Kristof Titeca, a Uganda expert based at Antwerp University.
“What’s left is a group of core supporters. Is there a grassroots opposition? No, there isn’t. It’s way too dangerous.”