In a world where national power is often measured by armies, navies, and air forces, a small but significant group of sovereign states challenges this assumption. These countries operate without official military forces, relying instead on diplomacy, police units, paramilitary structures, and formal defense agreements with allies. As global tensions intensify, their security models have gained renewed international attention.
According to international defense databases and UN-recognized security frameworks, at least 21 countries currently function without standing militaries. Some dismantled their armed forces decades ago, while others never created one after independence. Their experiences show that sovereignty and stability can be maintained through law, alliances, and regional cooperation, rather than traditional militarization.
How do countries without a military defend themselves?
Countries without standing armies protect themselves through a combination of:
-
International defense treaties
-
Regional security organizations
-
Well-equipped police or paramilitary forces
-
Diplomacy and international law
In many cases, defense responsibilities are formally delegated to allied powers, while internal security is handled by national police forces trained to manage emergencies and civil order.
Key countries without official militaries and their security arrangements
| Country | Security arrangement |
|---|---|
| Costa Rica | Abolished its military in 1949; relies on national police and international law |
| Panama | Army dissolved in 1990; constitutionally banned in 1994; paramilitary police units |
| Iceland | No standing army; defense provided through NATO and US agreements |
| Liechtenstein | Army abolished in 1868; defense cooperation with Switzerland |
| Monaco | Defense guaranteed by France under long-standing treaty |
| Vatican City | Protected by Italy; internal security by Swiss Guard |
| Mauritius | No army; maintains Special Mobile Force; close security ties with India |
| Grenada | Military disbanded in 1983; member of Caribbean Regional Security System |
| Dominica | Relies on regional security cooperation |
| Palau | Defense guaranteed by the United States until at least 2044 |
| Micronesia | Defense responsibility held by the United States |
| Tuvalu | No military since independence; policing supported by Australia |
| Solomon Islands | No army; police supported by Australia and New Zealand |
| Samoa | No standing military; defense cooperation with New Zealand |
| Andorra | Defense jointly guaranteed by France and Spain |
Regional patterns: where demilitarized states are concentrated
Europe
Microstates such as Monaco, Andorra, Liechtenstein, and Vatican City rely on neighboring powers for defense, reflecting long-standing treaties and geographic realities.
Pacific Islands
Tuvalu, Palau, Micronesia, Samoa, and the Solomon Islands prioritize development and climate resilience, outsourcing defense to allies like the US, Australia, and New Zealand.
Caribbean
Grenada and Dominica depend on regional security frameworks rather than national armies.
Central America
Costa Rica and Panama represent rare examples of constitutionally demilitarized states, redirecting defense budgets to social development.
Why some countries choose not to maintain a military
Historical decisions
Costa Rica abolished its military after a civil war in 1948, investing heavily in education, healthcare, and democratic institutions instead.
Economic priorities
Small island states often lack the financial capacity to sustain armed forces and prioritize development, disaster response, and climate adaptation.
Defense agreements
Countries such as Palau and Micronesia operate under long-term compacts that guarantee protection by major powers.
Geopolitical realities
European microstates depend on proximity to powerful neighbors and international law for security.
Risks and benefits of having no military
Benefits
-
Lower defense spending
-
Greater investment in social sectors
-
Reduced risk of military coups
-
Stronger emphasis on diplomacy
Risks
-
Dependence on allies
-
Limited independent defense capability
-
Vulnerability to shifts in global power politics
Despite these risks, such states mitigate threats through treaty law, international institutions, and multilateral diplomacy.
Also Read: Safest countries to visit in 2026 ranked by peace and stability
Global significance
These countries demonstrate that sovereignty does not always require a standing army. Their survival strategies challenge conventional security models and highlight alternative paths to peace, stability, and development. In an era of rising militarization, they offer a compelling case for diplomacy-driven security rooted in cooperation rather than force.
