CCPCJ 2025 — Militarized Budgets

Diana (Moderator)

Hello. Good morning, afternoon. Thank you very much for joining us at this official event of the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice entitled Balancing Security Investments: Rethinking Militarized Budgets in Latin America. My name is Diana and I'll be guiding today's conversation.

This event is part of a global response to the call for contributions launched by the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA), which seeks to gather perspectives on military spending and its implications. Our conversation will inform future UN reports and multilateral dialogues on disarmament and development.

Today, as military budgets grow across Latin America, poverty and inequality persist, public trust weakens, and sustainable peace remains out of reach. This event brings together academics, civil society leaders, former military officers, and human rights defenders to examine how we can redirect our budgets and policies from militarization to peacebuilding, justice, and well-being.

Félix Madariaga (Chile)

Today I want to talk to you about the costs of militarization in Chile, its impact on democracy, human rights and the social fabric. I will do so from a key moment in our recent history: the social outbreak that occurred in Chile in 2019, where thousands of people took to the streets throughout the country.

What was the State's response? Repression. In the first five months of the outbreak alone, the Carabineros fired 193,000 tear gas canisters and threw 45,000 chemical grenades at the population. They used 152,000 pellet cartridges in just three months. It was a massive use of so-called "less lethal" weaponry that left serious consequences: people injured, intoxicated, with eye damage, mutilations and traumas.

Behind the repression there was ideology and business. A single company called Millenium Limitada was responsible for 86% of the anti-riot shotguns purchased by the Carabineros and 100% of the gas rifles. According to Chile's National Institute of Human Rights, 3,838 people were injured by state agents. 1,580 were minors.

So, we ask ourselves: what are the costs of militarization? We are not only talking about millions of dollars spent on weapons. We are talking about thousands of victims, a violated citizenry and a totally weakened democracy. When the state responds violently to social protest, it not only represses bodies: it also represses voices, ideas, and rights.

Julio Yao (Panama)

In Panama's history with the United States, the role of the United States has been exaggeratedly preponderant in favor of imperialist interests. Today, we have gone back to the beginning of the 20th century. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth made Panama sign a memorandum of understanding containing the most serious points.

The United States asked us to break with the Belt and Road Initiative. They asked that U.S. ships pass through Panama completely free of charge — violating the Neutrality Treaty. They have also asked us to establish military bases in Panama: Fort Sherman, Rodman, and here in the Pacific.

Currently, popular forces — including students, doctors, teachers, construction workers, the entire indigenous movement — are against the government and there is brutal repression. A lot has been spent on the massive use of tear gas to crush the popular revolt. We consider that the country is in an extremely delicate situation.

Daira Aguilar (Global Thought, Mexico)

At Global Thought we believe that the need to think about strategies and institutional changes to redirect investments in security towards peacebuilding, gender justice and sustainable development is undeniable. Transformations must not only occur in the governmental sphere, but also outside it.

States that have taken firm steps to adopt feminist foreign policies have an area of opportunity to redesign not only their foreign policy principles, but also their national policies to redirect government spending to the effective construction of national care systems.

If States continue to spend exorbitant amounts on small arms and light weapons, they are more likely to fail to invest in care, education, health and community welfare. An important aspect is to reduce the socialization made from childhood towards firearms. War toys currently represent an alternative for child caregivers, but gun violence is not a game.

Per Ortega (Justícia i Pau, Spain)

Based on the latest SIPRI report from April, global military spending has increased by 9.4% compared to 2023, arriving at the figure of 2,718,000 million dollars — equal to 2.5% of global GDP. That's crazy. It is barbaric.

However, what SIPRI says about Latin America is that it is decreasing its military spending — by 1.5% overall. Latin America is on the right track. Central America and the Caribbean spend only 0.17% of GDP. But not many resources devoted to rearmament doesn't mean the armed forces aren't militaristic — they can be the armed wing of states in the repression of internal populations.

My proposals for demilitarization: strengthen civilian security with professionalized police forces; promote education for peace starting from childhood; demand transparency in military budgets; build regional alliances for peace through CELAC, UNASUR or MERCOSUR; and empower civil society — social movements, universities, indigenous peoples, organized women, youth.

Pablo Ruiz Espinosa (SERPAJ, Chile)

Today in Latin America we are experiencing a militarist offensive often disguised as citizen security. But what is at stake is a model that puts force above dialogue, weapons above rights, and turns our communities into war zones.

In Chile, we have had a military presence in Mapuche territory for years. In Colombia, Mexico, Peru — militarization is used to control social protest, protect extractivist interests, and criminalize indigenous peoples, youth, women. All supported by public budgets: tanks, helicopters, rifles are bought while schools are falling down and there are no hospitals in rural areas.

At SERPAJ we talk about human security: access to a life free of structural violence — free from hunger, racism, patriarchy, discrimination, extractivism. That is not achieved with more weapons. It is achieved with more community, more health, more education, more participation.

Juliana Villano (Federal University of Santa Catarina, Brazil)

I organize my ideas around three dimensions fundamental to rethinking security budgets: the regional structure, the public security model, and the social and political control of the armed forces.

In Brazil, the security model is strongly based on repression and punishment. The military police act with broad power to exercise violence, often with impunity. The result is very high police lethality, especially against young black people in urban peripheries.

One of the main weaknesses of our democratic systems is the lack of effective mechanisms of control over the armed and security forces. There is very little budget transparency, little accountability. This creates a culture of impunity that weakens democracy. We need security policies based on respect for life and human dignity.

Dr. William Marcy (Independent Researcher, USA)

The militarization strategy has never delivered sustainable results in Latin America in the context of the war on drugs. This war, initiated under Richard Nixon, has caused profound distortions. It has never solved the structural problems of supply and demand. On the contrary, it has strengthened illicit economies, turning drugs into highly profitable commodities.

The Merida Initiative, implemented in 2007 under Felipe Calderón in Mexico, was another example of how militarization exacerbates violence. Homicides skyrocketed from 2,000 to 15,000 in a few years. The disappearance of the 43 students from Ayotzinapa in 2014 exemplifies the tragic consequences: innocent students were victims of a perverse alliance between authorities and organized crime.

In conclusion, the militarization of the war on drugs has backfired. It has escalated violence, weakened democratic institutions, undermined human rights, and created more problems than it has solved.

Gustavo Flores Macías (Cornell University)

The main question guiding my research is: how have public security crises affected democracy in Latin America? My main argument is that these crises have opened the door to "punitive populism": the search for seemingly easy short-term solutions such as heavy-handed policies.

The two main mechanisms: the use of states of emergency, which allow more power concentrated in the Executive and limit civil rights; and the replacement of civilian police by the army for public security tasks. Militarization has a direct impact on the quality of democracy, by limiting rights, weakening checks and balances, and fostering impunity.

Carmen Capriles (Reacción Climática, Bolivia)

One of the issues we are concentrating on is that rare earths and critical minerals are needed for the energy transition. Unfortunately, since Russia invaded Ukraine, there is also demand for these materials for weapons manufacture. And one of the suppliers is Latin America.

Latin America provided copper, tin, manganese for weapons in World War II. Currently, our natural resources promote extractivism, promote sacrifice zones, impact local communities. Although minerals are being extracted to meet international military demand, the royalties left in our countries are very low — not even 5% in most cases.

It is necessary that in Latin America we continue to talk about and promote peace and demilitarization processes, because military spending is often unnecessary.

Diana (Moderator, Closing)

Thank you all for your active participation. We hope that this consultation will fuel a broader dialogue on the need to rethink military spending globally. We invite you to stay in touch and continue the conversation in future panels.