Tweet
THE MIRAGE OF ARMENIA'S LEVEL OF MILITARIZATION
BY STAFF - POSTED ON DECEMBER 29, 2014POSTED IN: ARMENIA, NEWS
by: Z. S. Andrew Demirdjian, Ph.D.
In the USA Armenian Life Magazine of December 19-25, 2014 issue,
there was an article which attracted my attention with the speed of
lightening. The headline read: "Armenia 3rd Most Militarized Country
in World, Claims New Study." I had to read it several times before I
could decide that I was reading it realistically and not wishfully.
The reason this article grabbed my attention is because a year ago, I
had an article titled "Azerbaijan: An Avalanche in the Making"
published, in which I presented comparative data to show that
Azerbaijan was considerably ahead of Armenia in the following three
crucial areas: weaponry, economy, and population. So, how could all
of a sudden Armenia is way ahead of Azerbaijan in militarization when
the former just purchased heavy weapons from Russia for $4 billion and
from Israel for $7 billion not to mention how much from Pakistan,
China, and the USA? As we all know, Azerbaijan has been on a frenzy
arms race in the last ten years.
This arguable study was conducted by the Bonn International Center for
Conversion (BICC) of Germany. Out of the 152 states examined in terms
of militarization levels based on the 2014 Global Militarisation Index
(GMI), Israel, Singapore, Armenia, Syria, Russia, Cyprus, South Korea,
Jordan, Greece and Azerbaijan (ranked 1 to 10). These ten countries
were ranked with the highest levels of militarization.
The decision criteria in the methodology of the "...GMI is divided into
three overarching categories: expenditure, personnel and heavy
weapons.
1- Military spending in relation to GDP [Gross Domestic Product]
and health spending are the most important indicators for determining
the level of militarization.
2- Besides military expenditure, the level of militarization is
also represented by the relation of military personnel to the total
population and physicians.
3- Finally, to determine the level of militarization of a country,
which does not only consist of resources and personnel, specific types
of heavy weapons have to be taken into account. This is why the GMI,
as its third category takes into consideration the number of an armed
forces' heavy weapons in relation to the total population."
In this commentary, I shall focus on how misleading conclusions were
drawn on Armenia's "Military spending in relation to its GDP [Gross
Domestic Product]..." based on inappropriate research methodology in
terms of statistical procedures used in this descriptive study in
determining the spectrum of rankings.
Before I discuss the "artifactuality" of the methodology involved in
the BICC study, let me give you a simple case as an illustration of
deception through statistical manipulation of data:
Some years ago, a university assistant professor was commissioned by
Proctor and Gamble to conduct a survey study to determine how
preferred was Crest vs. its major competitor (Pepsodent) in Baton
Rouge, Louisiana. Pressed for time, the researcher undertook a quick
and dirty study and reported that 75 percent of those surveyed
preferred Crest over Pepsodent. Long story short, for retention and
promotion purposes the chairman of the professor's department examines
the methodology of the study and finds out that this professor had
drawn the conclusion based on a sample of 8 students! Out of 8
respondents, 6 had preferred Crest. Is the conclusion of this study
valid? Of course, you'd respond with a resounding NO! Because the
sample is too small (technically speaking, it does not approximate a
normal curve). Well, over 95 percent of reported medical findings are
based on statistically insignificant, non-probability samples for
inferential studies based on deductive reasoning. That is why we get
often conflicting results from the same type of studies in the medical
field from a spurious observation or result arising from preparatory
or investigative procedures.
In the 1980s, when United States was being overrun by Japan, it was
even stated in textbooks that one of the reasons Japan was ahead
because it spent on R&D (Research and Development) more money than the
U.S. Later on, upon closer examination it was found out that the
comparison of R&D spending was based as a percentage of Gross National
Product (GNP), namely, R&D expenditures divided by GNP. In terms of
absolute dollar amounts spent on R&D, US was handily head over
shoulders ahead of Japan! Since US's GNP was larger than Japan's GNP,
the US had a larger divisor of the R&D expenditures. Therefore, the
relatively small result in percentages for the US was confounding and
distorting the facts at best.
By the same token of theoretical thinking, let us assume Armenia and
Azerbaijan have recently spent the same amount of money on heavy
weapons, say $100 million each (for the sake of simplicity). Let us
further assume that Armenia's GDP is $300 million and Azerbaijan's GDP
is $900 million. Now, which country spends more on weapons? As a
percentage of GDP followed by BICC's methodology Armenia has the
higher level of militarization (100 ÷ 300 = 33% ; 100 ÷ 900 = 11%).
As a percentage of GDP, Armenia has spent three times more than
Azerbaijan. However, in terms of absolute amounts of money spent on
heavy weapons, Azerbaijan has all that petro dollars to militarize its
9 million population in the hope of usurping Karabakh and the
"Yerevan Khanate" which includes Lake Sevan from the Armenians, the
indigenous people of Anatolia!
Mark Twain once said, "There are lies, dammed lies, and statistics".
That is to say, the power of numbers can either show big or small
difference between two or more things when the data are statistically
massaged. While Armenia being the 3rd most militarized country would
have the advantage of intimidation (over the bellicose Ilham Aliyev),
let us not delude ourselves, though, that Armenia has become
invincible. This is not to say that Armenia is weak. The Armenian
solider will fight for survival and defend his or her ancestral lands
with utmost bravery. The aim here is not to disregard the enemy which
is in reality spending a fortune, mega dollars on weapons and is
rapidly becoming a troublesome Goliath.
BICC's study has only created a mirage. This process is a case of
perceptual paradox (which exposes a misunderstanding of our awareness
and perception of reality, and how this misunderstanding imbeds a
false sense of certainty about what is and what is not real). Lying
with statistics on purpose, by accident or through ignorance sounds
unrefined. I prefer the term "statistical miss-communication," but the
blunt phrase "how to lie with statistics" has been the subject and the
title of over thirty books. Armenia's total spending on weapons is
illusory or insubstantial if we use the correct methodology in
descriptive studies.
The Emperor has no clothes! We cannot be complacent for BICC's
methodology of ranking is not objective or scientific. There is some
psychological satisfaction in that statement that Armenia is 3rd in
the world. Most Armenians will welcome and be proud of that news.
However, this kind of news is misleading, it is miss-communication,
and it is downright misinformation.
False expectations are detrimental to all of Armenia's friends.
Misinformation and misperception would hurt Armenia for being overly
prepared to defend itself in the event of war. In fact, to follow the
principle of parity, the US should give Armenia a substantial increase
in military aid. Otherwise, it would be lopsided; Armenia would be at
a disadvantage against the naked aggression coming from Baku. Over the
last ten years, Azerbaijan has amassed modern weaponry to the hilt.
Let us stand vigil, let us get more weapons, let us increase our
level of real militarization over our hostile neighbor -and let us err
on the side of caution in order not to be caught again in the jaws of
a proven genocidal, fang-baring perpetrators.
http://www.armenianlife.com/2014/12/29/the-mirage-of-armenias-level-of-militarization/
BY STAFF - POSTED ON DECEMBER 29, 2014POSTED IN: ARMENIA, NEWS
by: Z. S. Andrew Demirdjian, Ph.D.
In the USA Armenian Life Magazine of December 19-25, 2014 issue,
there was an article which attracted my attention with the speed of
lightening. The headline read: "Armenia 3rd Most Militarized Country
in World, Claims New Study." I had to read it several times before I
could decide that I was reading it realistically and not wishfully.
The reason this article grabbed my attention is because a year ago, I
had an article titled "Azerbaijan: An Avalanche in the Making"
published, in which I presented comparative data to show that
Azerbaijan was considerably ahead of Armenia in the following three
crucial areas: weaponry, economy, and population. So, how could all
of a sudden Armenia is way ahead of Azerbaijan in militarization when
the former just purchased heavy weapons from Russia for $4 billion and
from Israel for $7 billion not to mention how much from Pakistan,
China, and the USA? As we all know, Azerbaijan has been on a frenzy
arms race in the last ten years.
This arguable study was conducted by the Bonn International Center for
Conversion (BICC) of Germany. Out of the 152 states examined in terms
of militarization levels based on the 2014 Global Militarisation Index
(GMI), Israel, Singapore, Armenia, Syria, Russia, Cyprus, South Korea,
Jordan, Greece and Azerbaijan (ranked 1 to 10). These ten countries
were ranked with the highest levels of militarization.
The decision criteria in the methodology of the "...GMI is divided into
three overarching categories: expenditure, personnel and heavy
weapons.
1- Military spending in relation to GDP [Gross Domestic Product]
and health spending are the most important indicators for determining
the level of militarization.
2- Besides military expenditure, the level of militarization is
also represented by the relation of military personnel to the total
population and physicians.
3- Finally, to determine the level of militarization of a country,
which does not only consist of resources and personnel, specific types
of heavy weapons have to be taken into account. This is why the GMI,
as its third category takes into consideration the number of an armed
forces' heavy weapons in relation to the total population."
In this commentary, I shall focus on how misleading conclusions were
drawn on Armenia's "Military spending in relation to its GDP [Gross
Domestic Product]..." based on inappropriate research methodology in
terms of statistical procedures used in this descriptive study in
determining the spectrum of rankings.
Before I discuss the "artifactuality" of the methodology involved in
the BICC study, let me give you a simple case as an illustration of
deception through statistical manipulation of data:
Some years ago, a university assistant professor was commissioned by
Proctor and Gamble to conduct a survey study to determine how
preferred was Crest vs. its major competitor (Pepsodent) in Baton
Rouge, Louisiana. Pressed for time, the researcher undertook a quick
and dirty study and reported that 75 percent of those surveyed
preferred Crest over Pepsodent. Long story short, for retention and
promotion purposes the chairman of the professor's department examines
the methodology of the study and finds out that this professor had
drawn the conclusion based on a sample of 8 students! Out of 8
respondents, 6 had preferred Crest. Is the conclusion of this study
valid? Of course, you'd respond with a resounding NO! Because the
sample is too small (technically speaking, it does not approximate a
normal curve). Well, over 95 percent of reported medical findings are
based on statistically insignificant, non-probability samples for
inferential studies based on deductive reasoning. That is why we get
often conflicting results from the same type of studies in the medical
field from a spurious observation or result arising from preparatory
or investigative procedures.
In the 1980s, when United States was being overrun by Japan, it was
even stated in textbooks that one of the reasons Japan was ahead
because it spent on R&D (Research and Development) more money than the
U.S. Later on, upon closer examination it was found out that the
comparison of R&D spending was based as a percentage of Gross National
Product (GNP), namely, R&D expenditures divided by GNP. In terms of
absolute dollar amounts spent on R&D, US was handily head over
shoulders ahead of Japan! Since US's GNP was larger than Japan's GNP,
the US had a larger divisor of the R&D expenditures. Therefore, the
relatively small result in percentages for the US was confounding and
distorting the facts at best.
By the same token of theoretical thinking, let us assume Armenia and
Azerbaijan have recently spent the same amount of money on heavy
weapons, say $100 million each (for the sake of simplicity). Let us
further assume that Armenia's GDP is $300 million and Azerbaijan's GDP
is $900 million. Now, which country spends more on weapons? As a
percentage of GDP followed by BICC's methodology Armenia has the
higher level of militarization (100 ÷ 300 = 33% ; 100 ÷ 900 = 11%).
As a percentage of GDP, Armenia has spent three times more than
Azerbaijan. However, in terms of absolute amounts of money spent on
heavy weapons, Azerbaijan has all that petro dollars to militarize its
9 million population in the hope of usurping Karabakh and the
"Yerevan Khanate" which includes Lake Sevan from the Armenians, the
indigenous people of Anatolia!
Mark Twain once said, "There are lies, dammed lies, and statistics".
That is to say, the power of numbers can either show big or small
difference between two or more things when the data are statistically
massaged. While Armenia being the 3rd most militarized country would
have the advantage of intimidation (over the bellicose Ilham Aliyev),
let us not delude ourselves, though, that Armenia has become
invincible. This is not to say that Armenia is weak. The Armenian
solider will fight for survival and defend his or her ancestral lands
with utmost bravery. The aim here is not to disregard the enemy which
is in reality spending a fortune, mega dollars on weapons and is
rapidly becoming a troublesome Goliath.
BICC's study has only created a mirage. This process is a case of
perceptual paradox (which exposes a misunderstanding of our awareness
and perception of reality, and how this misunderstanding imbeds a
false sense of certainty about what is and what is not real). Lying
with statistics on purpose, by accident or through ignorance sounds
unrefined. I prefer the term "statistical miss-communication," but the
blunt phrase "how to lie with statistics" has been the subject and the
title of over thirty books. Armenia's total spending on weapons is
illusory or insubstantial if we use the correct methodology in
descriptive studies.
The Emperor has no clothes! We cannot be complacent for BICC's
methodology of ranking is not objective or scientific. There is some
psychological satisfaction in that statement that Armenia is 3rd in
the world. Most Armenians will welcome and be proud of that news.
However, this kind of news is misleading, it is miss-communication,
and it is downright misinformation.
False expectations are detrimental to all of Armenia's friends.
Misinformation and misperception would hurt Armenia for being overly
prepared to defend itself in the event of war. In fact, to follow the
principle of parity, the US should give Armenia a substantial increase
in military aid. Otherwise, it would be lopsided; Armenia would be at
a disadvantage against the naked aggression coming from Baku. Over the
last ten years, Azerbaijan has amassed modern weaponry to the hilt.
Let us stand vigil, let us get more weapons, let us increase our
level of real militarization over our hostile neighbor -and let us err
on the side of caution in order not to be caught again in the jaws of
a proven genocidal, fang-baring perpetrators.
http://www.armenianlife.com/2014/12/29/the-mirage-of-armenias-level-of-militarization/