What's new

Saudi Arabia announces 20% defence budget increase

80 billion, wow that is huge.

Saudi already spends more on defence than the rest of the region combined. That's an amazing position to be in. :cheers:
 
.
Woah! that's a massive rise in the defence budget, with $80 dollars they can do a lot ,it would be better to build a domestic industry rather than simply buying weapons. With Israel becoming stronger and stronger every other day ,and with Iran cosy up with the US and sanctions easing up slowly,this move was in a way expected. Wish even India was floating on Black gold :(
 
.
Woah! that's a massive rise in the defence budget, with $80 dollars they can do a lot ,it would be better to build a domestic industry rather than simply buying weapons. With Israel becoming stronger and stronger every other day ,and with Iran cosy up with the US and sanctions easing up slowly,this move was in a way expected. Wish even India was floating on Black gold :(

China and India spend very little as a percentage of GDP (China is only officially 1.4%) due to our development strategies.

When it gets to the 2025 point and our economy is at a good size, then we can bump up defence spending to around 3% of GDP. And by that time we will have plenty of mature weapons platforms to spend the money on.

Spending 5% of GDP like USA and Russia is unnecessary for us. Saudi can spend 11% because they have massive surpluses and it doesn't negatively impact their government budget too much.

Soviet Union spent around 30% of GDP on defence, which was unsustainable. Nazi Germany spent around 15% of GDP on defence if I recall correctly. Overall 3% seems like the best compromise.
 
. .
80 billion, wow that is huge.

Saudi already spends more on defence than the rest of the region combined. That's an amazing position to be in. :cheers:

Shouldn't they have a decisive military edge in the region then?

They don't.
 
. .
Im sure this has nothing to do with the fact that IS is suddenly a but more dangerous than one thought.
 
.
The increase is because of the Navy's deal(s). The Navy if reports I heard were true is going to become the forward facing force of KSA in the future in stead of the Air Force. KSA wants to absorb the US's role in the region. And that is a large undertaking.

You hit the jackpot here.

This development was inevitable as the navy has been neglected for way too long and projecting power nowadays is still done most accurately with a powerful navy.

Why does this also makes sense? Well, KSA borders a 2500 km long and 250-300 km wide Red Sea on average that is connected to the nearby Mediterranean Sea and nearby Arabian Sea and from there on the Indian Ocean. Moreover the Red Sea is one of the most busiest seas and strategically, economically etc. most important seas. 25% of the entire sea trade in this world goes through the Red Sea. Then you have the Gulf that is home to more natural resources than any other place of this size. It has a huge importance politically, economically, strategically too. From there you have access to the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea.

Aside from that you have a US (current naval power in our immediate region) that is showing less and less interest in the ME instead to focus on China.

What does all this mean? Well it basically means that KSA and the GCC as a whole (nothing that KSA is buying or UAE or any other GCC state is not taking into the overall account of things) want to project power and be the main power in their own immediate region. Meaning the Red Sea, Gulf, Arabian Sea, parts of the Northwestern/Eastern Indian Ocean and even the Southeastern Mediterranean Ocean.

If this increase in the defense budget also is taken with a long-term aim at being more self-reliant and starting up an indigenous military sector of real worth then I will not complain.

Im sure this has nothing to do with the fact that IS is suddenly a but more dangerous than one thought.

This has absolutely nothing to do with ISIS.

1) ISIS will never be able to invade KSA since it's a major power and not a failed state like other states engaged in such a situation as of now.

2) If ISIS will somehow be able to infiltrate KSA for real the fight will be a guerrilla fight like during the 2000's when AQAP were successfully defeated. Sleeper cells, suicide attacks, bombings, assassinations etc. I don't see where a navy comes into the picture here or even an air force.

3) KSA has a a very potent secret intelligence service.
 
Last edited:
. .
You hit the jackpot here.

This development was inevitable as the navy has been neglected for way too long and projecting power nowadays is still done most accurately with a powerful navy.

Why does this also makes sense? Well, KSA borders a 2500 km long and 250-300 km wide Red Sea on average that is connected to the nearby Mediterranean Sea and nearby Arabian Sea and from there on the Indian Ocean. Moreover the Red Sea is one of the most busiest seas and strategically, economically etc. most important seas. 25% of the entire sea trade in this world goes through the Red Sea. Then you have the Gulf that is home to more natural resources than any other place of this size. It has a huge importance politically, economically, strategically too. From there you have access to the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea.

Aside from that you have a US (current naval power in our immediate region) that is showing less and less interest in the ME instead to focus on China.

What does all this mean? Well it basically means that KSA and the GCC as a whole (nothing that KSA is buying or UAE or any other GCC state is not taking into the overall account of things) want to project power and be the main power in their own immediate region. Meaning the Red Sea, Gulf, Arabian Sea, parts of the Northwestern/Eastern Indian Ocean and even the Southeastern Mediterranean Ocean.

If this increase in the defense budget also is taken with a long-term aim at being more self-reliant and starting up an indigenous military sector of real worth then I will not complain.



This has absolutely nothing to do with ISIS.

1) ISIS will never be able to invade KSA since it's a major power and not a failed state like other states engaged in such a situation as of now.

2) If ISIS will somehow be able to infiltrate KSA for real the fight will be a guerrilla fight like during the 2000's when AQAP were successfully defeated. Sleeper cells, suicide attacks, bombings, assassinations etc. I don't see where a navy comes into the picture here or even an air force.
-
as mentioned imp of geograhy and trade route..
do you think USA will allow to leave its control on that ..when world dyanmis shifting to asia in next few decades
-
with most of equipment AF from USA
Navy from france and germany .. will they allow SA dominace in euporan waters
 
.
You hit the jackpot here.

This development was inevitable as the navy has been neglected for way too long and projecting power nowadays is still done most accurately with a powerful navy.

Why does this also makes sense? Well, KSA borders a 2500 km long and 250-300 km wide Red Sea on average that is connected to the nearby Mediterranean Sea and nearby Arabian Sea and from there on the Indian Ocean. Moreover the Red Sea is one of the most busiest seas and strategically, economically etc. most important seas. 25% of the entire sea trade in this world goes through the Red Sea. Then you have the Gulf that is home to more natural resources than any other place of this size. It has a huge importance politically, economically, strategically too. From there you have access to the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea.

Aside from that you have a US (current naval power in our immediate region) that is showing less and less interest in the ME instead to focus on China.

What does all this mean? Well it basically means that KSA and the GCC as a whole (nothing that KSA is buying or UAE or any other GCC state is not taking into the overall account of things) want to project power and be the main power in their own immediate region. Meaning the Red Sea, Gulf, Arabian Sea, parts of the Northwestern/Eastern Indian Ocean and even the Southeastern Mediterranean Ocean.

If this increase in the defense budget also is taken with a long-term aim at being more self-reliant and starting up an indigenous military sector of real worth then I will not complain.



This has absolutely nothing to do with ISIS.

1) ISIS will never be able to invade KSA since it's a major power and not a failed state like other states engaged in such a situation as of now.

2) If ISIS will somehow be able to infiltrate KSA for real the fight will be a guerrilla fight like during the 2000's when AQAP were successfully defeated. Sleeper cells, suicide attacks, bombings, assassinations etc. I don't see where a navy comes into the picture here or even an air force.
So Sir what are the future plans if you want to play some bigger roles you would need lot more Frigates than you currently have and also you would need Cruise Missile Destroyers and lots of Submarines and you don't seem even to close to ordering them so what are you basically trying to do ?
 
.
-
as mentioned imp of geograhy and trade route..
do you think USA will allow to leave its control on that ..when world dyanmis shifting to asia in next few decades
-
with most of equipment AF from USA
Navy from france and germany .. will they allow SA dominace in euporan waters

KSA and the GCC has to project power in its own immediate neighborhood especially when that neighborhood (in this case seas) are so crucial economically, politically, strategically and in terms of trade. You rarely find such important waters in the world.
There is no other option for an ambitious country like KSA or an ambitious organization like the GCC. If not then KSA and the GCC might as well handle over sovereignty to some power like the US to do all the work for them with certain obligations etc.

USA will have no problem with KSA and the GCC getting more powerful in their OWN immediate region as long as we still have cordial ties with the West. I see no reason to why we should cut ties to the West let alone anyone else. GCC is a perfect example of a region that lies very strategically and that has warm and close relations with the West, China, India etc.

We are not talking about any dominance here. It's just about projecting power and having a presence in your own immediate region. The Eastern Mediterranean Sea is not the key area here but obviously the Red Sea, Gulf, Arabian Sea and Northern/Eastern Indian Ocean. BUT with a powerful navy you can also extend your presence to the nearby Eastern Mediterranean Sea. From the Northern Red Sea (Northern Hijaz) It's just a stone throw in ME geographical terms at least.

Of course this will be done together with our neighbors and brothers and sisters in nearby Egypt and hopefully a future free Syria. Yes, Israel has a strong presence in that region of the Mediterranean Sea but that should not stop any plans.

So Sir what are the future plans if you want to play some bigger roles you would need lot more Frigates than you currently have and also you would need Cruise Missile Destroyers and lots of Submarines and you don't seem even to close to ordering them so what are you basically trying to do ?

Well, rest assured that something on the navy front is going to happen and this will be a gradual and long-term process. It's not something that you do overnight. KSA has had years to think about how to strengthen the navy hence all those rumors in the past few years.

Right now our navy is nothing to write home about. There is a big, sorry even a gigantic difference, between the quality of our air force and our navy for instance. That gap should not be that big let alone be there in a ideal world.

The GCC as a whole will invest more in their navies. I have no doubt about this. Especially as the air forces can hardly get any better.

Hopefully in 10 years time or so when the GCC becomes even more powerful (and maybe expands with Yemen and Jordan) we will merge into 1 big country. But that's another discussion.
 
Last edited:
.
KSA and the GCC has to project power in its own immediate neighborhood especially when that neighborhood (in this case seas) are so crucial economically, politically, strategically and in terms of trade. You rarely find such important waters in the world.
There is no other option for an ambitious country like KSA or an ambitious organization like the GCC. If not then KSA and the GCC might as well handle over sovereignty to some power like the US to do all the work for them with certain obligations etc.

USA will have no problem with KSA and the GCC getting more powerful in their immediate region as long as we still have cordial ties with the West. I see no reason to why we should cut ties to the West let alone anyone else. GCC is a perfect example of a region that lies very strategically and that has warm and close relations with the West, China, India etc.

We are not talking about any dominance here. It's just about projecting power and having a presence in your own immediate region. The Eastern Mediterranean Sea is not the key area here but obviously the Red Sea, Gulf, Arabian Sea and Northern/Eastern Indian Ocean. BUT with a powerful navy you can also extend your presence to the nearby Eastern Mediterranean Ocean. From the Northern Red Sea (Northern Hijaz) It's just a stone throw in ME geographical terms at least.

Of course this will be done together with our neighbors and brothers and sisters in nearby Egypt and hopefully a future free Syria. Yes, Israel has a strong presence in that region of the Mediterranean Ocean but that should not stop any plans.



Well, rest assured that something on the navy front is going to happen and this will be a gradual and long-term process. It's not something you do overnight.

Right now our navy is nothing to write home about. There is a big, sorry even a gigantic difference, between the quality of our air force and our navy for instance. That gap should not be that big let alone be there in a ideal world.

The GCC as a whole will invest more in their navies. I have no doubt about this.
--
Thanks
---
Red sea ..and immediate region
yes SA should have presence in said region .
--
SA navy..
IF RSAN need to toplay big role .. you need to have good navy atleast you can compare with india if not USA..
as geo is diffrent in these region ..
SA need to come with next 20 yr plan from now to have good potent fleet to stand on..
like SA Air force is top notch with Tech and equipment so you have repeat same with navy
 
.
China and India spend very little as a percentage of GDP (China is only officially 1.4%) due to our development strategies.

When it gets to the 2025 point and our economy is at a good size, then we can bump up defence spending to around 3% of GDP. And by that time we will have plenty of mature weapons platforms to spend the money on.

Spending 5% of GDP like USA and Russia is unnecessary for us. Saudi can spend 11% because they have massive surpluses and it doesn't negatively impact their government budget too much.

Soviet Union spent around 30% of GDP on defence, which was unsustainable. Nazi Germany spent around 15% of GDP on defence if I recall correctly. Overall 3% seems like the best compromise.
Agreed bro, for counties like India & china witha combined population of 2.5+ billion ppl,defence spending are to be put on the backburner,infra development to accomadate needs of the people is more important than blindly build yourself up militarily,USSR is a good example of what could happen if you would do that.
For now we can slowly keep building our Armed forces.

SA,wid a GDP percpita of $31,000 and oil to sustain its growth for another 2 decades or so would not mind spending 11% of its GDP but India on other hand with $38billion(2.1% of its GDP @$1.87trillion) still finds it quite hard to increase the budget to something like 15-20%. Same goes for china,i guess.
Anyways we will see the light of the day ,maybe after 10-15 years but we will ,we are destined to rule Asia ;) if not the world :devil:
 
.
Agreed bro, for counties like India & china witha combined population of 2.5+ billion ppl,defence spending are to put on the backburner,infra development to accomadate needs of the people is more important thzn blindly build yourself up militarily,USSR is a good example of what could happen if you would do that.

SA,wid a GDP percpita of $31,000 and oil to sustain its growth for another 2 decades or so would not mind spending 11% of its GDP but India on other hand with $38billion(2.1% of its GDP @$1.87trillion) still finds it quite hard to increase the budget to something like 15-20%. Same goes for china,i guess.
Anyways we will see the light of the day ,maybe after 10-15 years but we will ,we are destined to rule Asia ;) if not the world :evil:
--
we are destined to rule Asia ;) if not the world

:-)
but better if we can win poverty , corrpution , caste system first :-)
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom