“Yankee Go Home” doesn’t apply to South Korea where only a half year ago its citizens demonstrated against our 37,000 troops stationed there — what with the north’s incessant provocation. After fifty years the south is nevertheless more than a match against its neighbor despite its larger army but poorly equipped. Even though South Korea spends ten times what the north does in armament — $320 per capita, or 3.4 percent of its GNP — it could fortify itself independent of the US, except for a nuclear threat, if its expenditure were modestly increased per capita.

North Korea, on the other hand, spends $255 per capita on military protection, or 28.6 percent of its meager gross national product (GNP). As long as the U.S. values it as a strategic base South Korea will never make an effort to defend itself.Likewise Europe has chosen to spend less on military power and as a consequence tries to worm out of difficult world problems by peaceful means or rely on U.S. military strength.

On the other hand, when delving into comparative military expense, the major nations in Europe do indeed carry their share and if ever truly united could be militarily competitive. For instance, the U.S. spends $1,056 per capita on military protection [more now I trust] or 3.8 percent of its gross national product (GNP). France, hardly an appeaser, spends a remarkable $826 per capita, or 3.1 percent of its GNP but more than Britain which is $572 per capita on military protection, or 3 percent of its gross national product (GNP).

In total dollars France spends $14 billion more than Britain, and $29 billion; less than Russia which spends 11.5% of its GNP. Germany because of U.S. presence is only 1.9 percent of GNP and $496 per capita; still its total expenditure is some $41 billion compared to Spain’s $8½ billion.

Nonetheless, if one considers the NATO members all together — including Canada and Turkey — the total expenditure of over 200 billion is virtually on a par with the U.S. From this vantage point, we can hardly think of Europe as slackers. If Russia should join, NATO’s total expenditures [excluding the U.S.] will exceed our total military expenditures by approximately $50 billion.

Given that France at times is petulant as for example when De Gaulle withdrew its military from NATO because US was so dominant, it found its way back and contributed to peace-keeping in Bosnia and Kosovo. Of course, it was a strong participatory ally in the first Gulf War, and has troops in Afghanistan. Consensus — along with never forgetting their rapid surrender in WWII — confuses national pride and independence with appeasement. The French do have a point in believing that in a new millennium, perhaps there is an alternative to war.

If the US continues to flaunt its “only super power” status, it will surely lead to a united Europe with a formidable military — particularly with Russia — second to none. The United States must end its can-do-no-wrong posture and heed other nations with competing views or another arms race might ensue.