End \\\'war\\\' now to end \\\'poverty\\\'

At the three-day summit held on September 25 to 27, 2015 in New York, the largest ever gathering of world leaders, the 193 member states of the United Nations pledged to work together to help the world's poorest people. They agreed on a set of targets that became known as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which include issues from eradicating poverty to preserving the planet.
Poverty is a denial of choices and opportunities, a violation of human dignity which can be defined by using three different concepts: income, basic needs and capability. Of these, the most commonly used concept is income, according to which a person is poor if his/her income is below a certain amount. The present benchmark defined by the World Bank as daily consumption of less than $ 1.25 per person identifies extreme poverty. Globally, 800 million people still live in extreme poverty, 57 million children are still denied the right to primary education, gender inequality continues to persist, and economic gaps between rich and poor households are growing, and as such the UN is proposing 17 new SDGs - which call for an end to poverty in all its forms everywhere. The implementation of the goals is expected to cost $3.5 trillion to $5 trillion every year until 2030. Experts, however, say the tough part will be to get the support and the funds to reach the 17 SDGs of the new agenda.
We think SDGs funding is not just about money, it is about rich nations' political will and inclusion. There is a tonne of money being spent in the wrong places. The present world does not seem to be a very nice place right now; there is too much of hatred, conflict, war, double standard and hypocrisy. According to a report just released by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), world military expenditures in 2012 totalled $1.75 trillion. And, the report revealed, as in all recent decades, the world's biggest military spender by far was the US government, whose expenditures for war and preparations for war amounted to $682 billion - 39 per cent of the global total. In 2011, the 100 largest contractors sold $410 billion in arms and military services. Just 10 of these companies sold over $208 billion. These companies have benefited tremendously from the growth in military spending in the United States, which by far has the largest military budget in the world. In 2000, the US defence budget was approximately $312 billion and by 2011, the figure grew to $712 billion. Arms sales also grew alongside general defence spending growth. SIPRI noted that between 2002 and 2011, arms sales among the top 100 companies grew by 51 per cent.
For the last several years, the Western rich and powerful nations have been preaching for 'world peace' but the statistics shows that since 1776 the United States has only been at peace for a total of 21 years. America has been at War 93% of that time - 222 out of 239 years.  Statistics also shows that by the end of 2008, the US had spent approximately $900 billion in direct costs on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. As of June 2011, the total cost of the wars was approximately $3.7 trillion. The combined military expenditure of the 27 EU member states is €194 billion.
A different study shows that to end extreme poverty worldwide in 20 years, the total cost per year would be about $175 billion. This represents less than one per cent of the combined income of the richest countries in the world. The military budget in the USA is about $712 billion per year. A large amount of other funding is directly connected to military spending in the states, bringing the total closer to $1.0 trillion per year. Even if we assume the lesser of these numbers, annual defence spending in the US is about four times as much money as is needed to begin rapidly ending extreme poverty in the entire world.
The Western countries including United States' double standard is an urgent issue that demands an immediate attention. These Western countries and their human rights defenders become very critical of every trifling issue in the third-world countries. They do not hesitate to put economic sanctions or other punishments on nations they think are guilty or lacking democracy but where does the conscience of those countries stand when US ex-President George W Bush used to say: "Either you are with me or you are against me"; and believed that the UNO is "irrelevant" if it didn't give him the decision he wanted. Even if 180 countries out of 193 in the United Nations General Assembly votes 'yes' but USA says 'no' then it is non-binding on USA. If 13 out of 15 in the Security Council, votes 'yes' on something that USA does not like - censuring the crimes against humanity committed by Israel for example - then USA vetoes and, thereby, spoils every aspect of democracy and totally destroys the very purpose for which the UNO was created - i.e. to govern the world of nations democratically and to ensure peace, prosperity and justice worldwide - with focus on the people of the world.
But unfortunately, there is a huge gap between the world we live in and the world we want. They need to remember, with great power comes great responsibility, and if they really want to achieve the goal of eradicating extreme poverty from the world they need to change their mindset and attitude. Now is the time for the Western countries to practise what they preach. We need to ensure a supply of jobs and a platform for skills creation which will provide the foundation for prosperous, sustainable and resilient livelihoods. If only some of their monstrous military's budget could be diverted towards humanitarian goals, building schools and skills development institutions in countries that are struggling, then extreme poverty in our world could quickly become a thing of the past.   
[email protected]