The US arms spending is on the slide, while Russia and China are on the rise. The notion is repeated more and more frequently by some media outlets and experts.

«Emerging military superpowers China and Russia sharply increased military expenditures in 2012 while spending by the US and most NATO-aligned European countries contracted», according to the «Arms Expenditure Report» released by think tank Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). It says the US share of world military spending in 2012 dropped below the 40 percent mark for the first time since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. By contrast, China raised its spending by 7.8 percent, or $7.8 billion, to $166 billion in 2012. Russia boosted its spending by 16 percent, or $12.3 billion, to $90.7 billion. (1)

According to the American Live Wire, «The military might of China and Russia grows; meanwhile America continues to cut defense spending. American Liberals believe that worrying about the rise of Russia and China while America cuts the defense budget is simply fear mongering» (2).

This February the US military brass hats met the Senate Armed Forces Committee to discuss the across-the-board cuts after March 1 sounding the alarm about the dangerous impact of the cuts on the combat-readiness of US troops. According to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin E. Dempsey, the sequestration will «put the nation at greater risk of coercion». Former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said it would «invite aggression»! Incumbent Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said the reductions would «devastate» the military. General James Amos, Commandant of the Marin Corps, goes even further in warning that a failure to properly resource the military will put the «continued prosperity and security interests» of the United States at risk.

Is Russia’s (or China’s) build up justified against the background of US cuts? Adducing facts is the best way to be come to an impartial judgment. A cursory look at what is taking tangible shape right now, this very year, would serve the purpose.