The meeting of the NATO Defense Minister in Brussels showed “comprehensive support” to sign a historic increase in defense spending at a crunch summit later this month on Thursday. This was his response to the rising threats from Russia and his response to the “Dangus World” in general, Mark Rute, general secretary of the military coalition, told reporters.
Rute announced, “I propose the overall investment plan that a total of 5% of the large domestic product in defense investment will be 5%.”
The current NATO guidelines encourage states to spend 2% of their economic production on their terrorists. But not all members of alliance meet this goal, raise the question of how they will reach a high -spending target.
Divide the bill
In response, NATO’s leading Rutte has specified a division of new spending targets that may allow Trump to claim a title figure, while other 31 nations may give their national budget to the room to maneuver. Thus, 5%, 3.5% of the national GDP can be allocated for “core defense expenses”, while the remaining 1.5% can be diverted as “security-related investment” such as defense-liberation and industry, he said.
Trump has long been criticized by NATO colleagues, which may be as a strategy to protect the European continent to rely on the US large army. In 2023, according to data compiled by Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), more than two -thirds of 32 NATO countries collective $ 1.3 trillion (€ 1.14 trillion) military expenses came from Washington.
On Thursday, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth once again conveyed a message to the rest of the alliance. “Each shoulder must be for plouge. Every country has to contribute at that level of 5% as the recognition of the nature of danger,” Heer said.
Leaders of the world’s most powerful Raksha coalition have been designed to gather in Dutch City Hague in three weeks. The ongoing war in the topping Ukraine at the agenda will be discussed, and Drives on a large scale as a result of Russia. NATO members seem to be committed to 5% target in these upcoming dialogues.
Put on
Under American pressure, and with the full -scale invasion of Russia in Ukraine in 2022, NATO Miltry expenses have already been buried in recent years. Most countries now meet 2% of the threshold, which had agreed 11 years ago. But about one third of the alliance is still not including Portugal, Italy, Canada, Belgium and Spain.
Most of the NATO states had indicated the willpower to spend more, but the 5% target was overcome by when Trump flew the idea earlier this year. Helped almost a year, the message is echoing with many in the coalition.
Earlier this week, 14 NATO states, including Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and five Nordic states, published a joint statement that they were “moving towards the final 5% of the GDP on defense and defense-related investments.”
Last month, German Foreign Minister Johann Wadepuhal also indicated that Germany could go on the board with a goal.
Many NATO countries, including Poland, Estonia and Lithuania, have already committed to spend 5% or more in the future. All formors are Soviet states, and two of them share a limit with Russia.
Since assuming office in January, the “America-first” estimate has affected the NATO alliance with threats to help protect the members of the coalition, which did not meet the targets spent. Her designs on semi-autonomous Danish region Greenland have made all colleagues so different, as Hanve found his efforts in Ukraine on bilateral talks to find Russia, which sidelined European partners and left Ukrainian President Volodimir Zelansky marginalized.
Questions remain
Many open questions are still being answered, one of them stops a time -line.
On Thursday, Estonian Defense Minister Hano Pavakur talked about committing to reach 5% within five years. “We do not have time for ten years, we do not even make time for seven years, to be honest,” Heer said.
But the official focus at this week’s meeting was at work that NATO would actually require capabilities and may disappear to defend themselves when attacking a member of the alliance. After the negotiations, Rute talked about the need to upgrade air defense systems and long -range missiles, amidst athing.
German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said that Germany may need more than 50,000 – 60,000 soldiers in its permanent forces to meet defense needs in the coming years.
Expenditure increased between economic recession
While the consensus appears to be formed, it is so clear that up to 5% of GDP will have a huge stress on public finance, especially as two major economies of Europe, Germany and France, faced hard times.
Paris and Berlin are increasing defense spending as an opportunity to promote economic growth in Europe, but there is a risk of public backlash. In April in Rome, the opposition five-star movement led a protest against the European Union Drive, which was a block-one step supported by the government of distant Prime Minister Georgia Meloni, shown to thousands of people.
According to Kullen Hendrix, for the specialist of Peterson Institute for International Economics, a US think tank, a 5% spending target, put wood required NATO countries on “war footing”.
“In 2023, only nine countries spent more on 5% of GDP or defense: Algeria, Armenia, Israel, Lebanon, Oman, Russia, Saudi Arabia and South Sudan,” Hendrix wrote in February. “Most are, or were, were. Five of these are powerful petro-steps, which are unaffected by competitive elections or need to impose tax on their population to fund this military largacy.”
Therefore there is a risk that Ithat increased expenses will make Europe less safe, Hendrix warned. “Increasing military expenses to this extent will be catalyzed in arms race with those close-letters contestants.”
In Brussels on Thursday, Rute argued that there were very few options to spend significant spending on defense, pointing to recent comments by German lead defense Carston Breaur, who said that Russia would be ready for an attack in NATO states by 2029.
“We live in a more dangerous world,” Rute said. “We are safe today, but if we don’t do this, we are not safe in future.”
Edited by: Maran Sas
