“Today, NATO’s military edge is being challenged by rapidly re-arming Russia, backed by Chinese technology and armed with Iranian and North Korean weapons. We need to unite, innovate and deliver.”
Why does it matter?If adopted, the 5% target would mark a massive shift in NATO’s defense policy—far surpassing the current 2% goal, which many members still haven’t met. Only 10 of 32 NATO members currently spend at least 2% of their GDP on defence, according to a Reuters report.
The new proposal would push core defence (troops, weapons) spending to 3.5%, while an additional 1.5% would go to broader security investments like military-use infrastructure and cybersecurity.
Several members, especially in southern Europe, are pushing back. Spanish PM Pedro Sánchez wrote to Rutte, calling the target “unreasonable” and “counterproductive.”“It would move Spain away from optimal spending and it would hinder the (European Union’s) ongoing efforts to strengthen its security and defense ecosystem,” according to the AP.
Spain spent just 1.3% of its GDP on defence last year—the lowest among NATO members. By contrast, Poland leads NATO in defence spending at 4% of GDP.
The broader picture
The push for the 5% target has strong backing from US President Donald Trump, who has long pressured NATO allies to shoulder a greater share of military costs.
On Friday, Trump insisted the US has carried its allies for years and now they must step up. “I don’t think we should, but I think they should,” he said. “NATO is going to have to deal with Spain.” Trump also branded Canada “a low payer”.
If approved by all 32 member nations on June 25, this would mark NATO’s most ambitious defence investment pledge in its history, reshaping alliance priorities amid rising threats, particularly from Russia and other adversaries such as China.
The Europeans believe Russia’s war on Ukraine poses an existential threat to them. Moscow has been blamed for a major rise in sabotage, cyberattacks and GPS jamming incidents. European leaders are gearing up their citizens for the possibility of more.
(Edited by : Ajay Vaishnav)