Trump demands NATO up defense budget amid rising tensions
Donald Trump is demanding that European NATO countries increase their defense spending. His actions might prove effective because Europe slowly realizes that if it wants to be safe, there is no other option.
Donald Trump will return to the White House in a few days, but his policy regarding NATO has been known for some time. During his previous presidency, he pressured member countries to spend 2% of their GDP on defense and later suggested raising this threshold to 4%.
In December, the Financial Times reported that Trump plans to demand member countries increase spending to as much as 5% of GDP. However, it is more commonly said that he would settle for 3.5%.
If there is something to criticize about Trump, it's that in demanding increased military spending, he likely doesn't fully understand how allies' budgets work. This primarily concerns the structure of expenditures. While the United States spends 3.38% of its GDP on the military, slightly more than 2% goes toward armaments. This is because healthcare for soldiers and veterans comes out of this budget. In contrast, in European countries and Canada, military healthcare is accounted for in ministries responsible for healthcare, not the military budget.
Thus, even if funding rules were equalized, Washington would have trouble meeting its president's requirements, much like Germany, which until recently did not meet the requirements regarding allocating 2% of its GDP to armaments. Germany was just €17 billion short, even though they exceeded the required threshold. The issue was that a special fund of €100 billion, intended solely for technical modernization, was not included in the defense ministry's budget. Similarly, healthcare and pension insurance were not included either.
Contrary to Trump's concerns, European NATO members are increasing defense spending. The European Union's common programs - the European Security Strategy and the European Defense Industrial Strategy - support this effort. Their financing also translates into increased European investment in security.
The East is the leader
The leaders in defense spending among European NATO members are the countries on the eastern flank, with Poland being the undisputed leader. According to a NATO report, in 2024 our spending was at 4.12% of GDP. Estonia came second with 3.43%, and Latvia rounded out the top three with 3.15% of GDP.
The actual expenditures are slightly different. Germany spends the most on the military, followed by the United Kingdom and France, which slightly exceed the 2% threshold. Poland is only fourth, although it allocates twice as much of its GDP to armaments.
Countries that vividly remember Soviet occupation and value their regained freedom are investing in security. One might get the impression that after the collapse of the USSR, the old NATO countries rested on their laurels and began to relax. It's also true that the further one gets from the Russian Federation and Belarus borders, the lower the spending. Nine countries, including Spain, Portugal, and Italy, did not exceed the two-percent threshold.
"The further from Russia, the poorer the social awareness of what the Russian regime is, and that you simply can't come to terms with Russia. In such countries, support for defense spending will be lower, and the perception of threats will be different," notes Dr Michał Piekarski, an international security specialist from the University of Wrocław.
The new NATO Secretary-General, Mark Rutte, is also urging an increase in defense spending.
"Today I call for your support, action is urgent. To protect our freedom, our prosperity and our way of life, your politicians need to listen to your voices. Tell them you accept to make sacrifices today so that we can stay safe tomorrow," Rutte said during a December appearance at the Concert Noble in Brussels.
The Dutchman also called for cuts in social spending, which he considers too large. He noted that the existing goal of allocating 2% of GDP to defense is insufficient and urged NATO member countries to adopt a "war mentality" to more effectively counter contemporary challenges.
The question is, will Europeans sacrifice social conveniences to build up the military? In societies, the awareness of the need to have armed forces and modernize them is low and only increases temporarily in situations like natural disasters.
"Observing the reactions of European public opinion, there is fatigue with war rhetoric," notes Jakub Link-Lenczowski, editor of the Military Magazine MilMag. "If people have been frightened for years with an impending armed conflict while grappling with the high price of butter and the Green Deal, a cognitive dissonance occurs. What might change attitudes are increasingly bold hybrid actions by Russia. Although they are below the threshold of war, they directly and painfully affect individual societies in Europe."
The biggest challenge currently is gaining public support to begin modernizing European armies. Most politicians look at the polls, and issues of long-term international security are postponed. Meanwhile, the European defense industry is a sleeping giant.
Sleeping power
Europe is home to some of the largest armament factories in the world, but many of them have been closed or scaled back. Essentially, the European industry has lost the ability to produce ammunition, artillery systems, and tanks on a large scale. For example, the United Kingdom literally dismantled its Royal Ordnance Factory tank factories in Leeds and Elswick in Newcastle upon Tyne, where Challenger tanks were made.
Production has been significantly reduced in other countries, even though large capacities remain. The French have a conserved tank production line at Atelier de Construction de Roanne, but restarting production would also cost too much for small-scale production to be profitable.
"The European defense industry has a very large potential," notes Link-Lenczowski. "It meets most of the characteristics typical of developed countries. It can produce engines for vehicles and ships and the most advanced jet and rocket engines."
"Europeans produce satellite systems, develop modern tanks, and work on a new generation of combat aircraft. The problem is the scale of these activities. However, changing this requires difficult decisions in politics and economics," adds the expert.
The decision to implement the European Defense Industrial Strategy, which sets goals for the defense industry until 2035, has been an important step. The strategy aims to help meet the goal set in 2007, which assumed that Union countries would produce 33% of the equipment. Currently, this figure is only 18%.
The current assumptions are that as much as 50% of defense spending is to go to the European industry, and 40% of new products are to come from cooperation among Union countries. This is intended to significantly strengthen the domestic defense industry and make it competitive in global markets.
Europe has enough time to start arming and adapting its armies to changing conditions. Russian involvement in Ukraine is so significant that the Kremlin currently lacks the capability to conduct another conflict. This will certainly change over time. Therefore, the problem lies in convincing citizens that increasing defense spending is necessary.
