Bangladesh improves 11 steps in new GFP ranking. Now 45th strongest military in the world.

[Homo Sapiens]

Bangladesh armed forces is now 45th strongest in the world according to Global Firepower Index 2019. Last year it was 56th. Most notable inclusion is 340 pieces of Towed Artillery in their list which earlier they showed zero. But defence budget is still showing outdated 1.59 billion US dollar figure. According to IISS 2018, Bangladesh has 841 pieces of Artillery. Last year's defence budget was 3.50 billion US dollar.
https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp
https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country_id=bangladesh

 

[Homo Sapiens]

The new ranking of BD is closer to it's real strength. Although Towed Artillery number shown is still less. Total active number of troops also shown less. 160k in their list, but in reality, it is more than 200k(last 5 years, BD Army expanded by 3 division). Similarly defence budget is also outdated. If all these are rectified, Bangladesh's ranking would come down to below 40, I believe.

 

[Avicenna]

This is so irrelevant.

 

[Baby Leone]

congrats to Bangladesh

 

[Bengal71]

This ranking is bs. BD has no airforce to speak of.

 

[Avisheik]

This GFP ranking is one of the laziest ranking systems. Its like they compile data from wikipedia and just ranks them based on numbers alone. There is no discrimination between the different generations of weapon systems in the countries arsenal. A japanese F15 has the same weight as a tanzanian mig 19, even though they are miles apart in technology or combat capability.

 

[zeeshe100]

why they showing Pakistan army reserve personnel 0 ? these ranks are not right.

 

[UKBengali]

This ranking is bs. BD has no airforce to speak of.

Not true. BAF has 8 Mig-29s and 16 J-7BGI that are still quite deadly with the KLJ-2 BVR radar that can fire missiles like SD-10, although I am not sure if they have been procured.

 

[I S I]

Brilliant job. Claps for India's unofficial 30th state.

 

[Bengal71]

Not true. BAF has 8 Mig-29s and 16 J-7BGI that are still quite deadly with the KLJ-2 BVR radar that can fire missiles like SD-10, although I am not sure if they have been procured.

I know that a and that's why I think it's not an airforce, it's a glorified flying club.

 

[VikingRaider]

So finally you have found a way to log in again after one month in this forum? Good and welcome back @Homo Sapiens .

 

[Homo Sapiens]

This GFP ranking is one of the laziest ranking systems. Its like they compile data from wikipedia and just ranks them based on numbers alone. There is no discrimination between the different generations of weapon systems in the countries arsenal. A japanese F15 has the same weight as a tanzanian mig 19, even though they are miles apart in technology or combat capability.

I think they take into account of the quality of weapons, although they do not consider it to be the only criteria to determine the overall military power of a country. Otherwise they would not have placed North Korea at 18th and South Korea at 7th. Although North Korea have more weapons by number. Some of the strongest and state of the art Air forces like Israel, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Singapore also quite behind in their ranking. I think they mostly determine military power by taking into account on the inherent strength of a country to endure a long and brutal war if a war continues to drag on for many years. In such scenarios, available man power, size of GDP, energy resource base, domestic defence industry, food self sufficiency, merchant marine ship strength etc. come forwards.

In a war scenario, when many foreign supply may become unavailable, domestic self sufficiency became vital for any nation to continue the war efforts. Now suppose, a country has latest quality weapons, but heavily dependent on long distance sea trade to feed it's population, so what would be the fate of such a country if any long term bilateral or regional war break out where normal shipping operation became impossible in that areas? Such country would have no choice other than to sue peace even at unfavorable terms for itself. Because food take precedence over weapons. This is just one aspect, similar case also can be made about man power, GDP size, domestic industry and others. I Think, GFP guys think along these lines to formulate their ranking.

 

[Avisheik]

I think they take into account of the quality of weapons, although they do not consider it to be the only criteria to determine the overall military power of a country. Otherwise they would not have placed North Korea at 18th and South Korea at 7th. Although North Korea have more weapons by number. Some of the strongest and state of the art Air forces like Israel, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Singapore also quite behind in their ranking. I think they mostly determine military power by taking into account on the inherent strength of a country to endure a long and brutal war if a war continues to drag on for many years. In such scenarios, available man power, size of GDP, energy resource base, domestic defence industry, food self sufficiency, merchant marine ship strength etc. come forwards.

In a war scenario, when many foreign supply may become unavailable, domestic self sufficiency became vital for any nation to continue the war efforts. Now suppose, a country has latest quality weapons, but heavily dependent on long distance sea trade to feed it's population, so what would be the fate of such a country if any long term bilateral or regional war break out where normal shipping operation became impossible in that areas? Such country would have no choice other than to sue peace even at unfavorable terms for itself. Because food take precedence over weapons. This is just one aspect, similar case also can be made about man power, GDP size, domestic industry and others. I Think, GFP guys think along these lines to formulate their ranking.

I think the reason they put south over the north is that they have more manpower and aircrafts as well as a greater diversity of naval vessels.

I dunno man, i really dont think they put in that much of an effort in coming up with their rankings. Singapore's domestic defence industry, weapons quality and training is miles ahead of Angola's and i doubt Angola's food security is any better than singapore. Growing food may not be a problem for angola, but storing and distributing definitely is. it But Angola is still ranked ahead.

Plus merchant marine ship strength is useless as companies register them wherever they like(tax, etc), doesnt mean the country will get to use them in times of war.

Yea i agree with you that more resources and manpower is necessary to weather out a brutal war. However, if we are talking about a brutal war, during a brutal war the general population must be educated enough to extract the resources, build, operate and repair the machines. There must be industrial infrastructures present to build or extract them. If your country is unable to repair or produce spares and missiles, the war machines will be grounded within a week.

To me the GFP ranking just downloads data from wiki without much closer examination of the data. Whenever i look through their list, it seems they always place numerical superiority of military assets as their deciding factor. Other factors seem to be just a sideshow and they provide no explanation or formula other than raw data. These observations are littered throughout the ranking, especially as you look towards the middle of the list (Belgium & Sudan etc.)

 

[Michael Corleone]

I know that a and that's why I think it's not an airforce, it's a glorified flying club.

why do you sound like beiruni?

 

[blain2]

Take GFP, find the nearest dustbin/trashcan and shove it in there. Its not worth the digital page its written on.