NATO allies will meet in The Hague next week and are expected to agree to significantly boost military expenditure, but Madrid is reluctant.

Spain wants a carve-out from NATO’s likely future defense spending goal of 5 percent of GDP, the country’s Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez said ahead of next week’s high-stakes alliance summit in The Hague.

“Spain will continue to fulfil its duty in the years and decades ahead and will continue to actively contribute to the European security architecture. However, Spain cannot commit to a specific spending target in terms of GDP at this summit,” Sánchez told NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte in a letter seen by POLITICO.

Spain has the lowest military spending of any NATO member, allocating just 1.3 percent of its GDP to defense in 2024. Sánchez said earlier this year that Russia didn’t pose an immediate security threat to Spain.

  • Pyr
    link
    fedilink
    English
    317 hours ago

    Isn’t the current requirement 2%? They want to more than double their budget?

  • @ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    311 day ago

    A lot of knee-jerk reactions here so to provide some context:

    The government will not do it because they are simply unable to. They were barely able to reach 3%. The ruling party and the PM do want to increase the spending but their minor, far-left coalition partner is against it. They would rather spend the money on social programs. The far-left party even voted to exit NATO altogether. They are simply not serious people. The PM finally managed to increase spending to 3% by using executive orders. They simply don’t have a path to pass a new budget and increase the spending to 5%. So yeah, it’s not the ruling party that’s shortsighted, it’s their progressive coalition partner who is against any spending on the military.

    • @black0ut@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1323 hours ago

      Spain used to have a budget of around 1% of their GDP for the military. It was so much that they actually could not spend it. Now that the budget has tripled almost overnight, they are having an internal crisis because there is no way they can use up all that money, even if they overbought 200% of supplies and overpaid for them.

      Increasing military budget is useless, because the service will not improve with it, just the useless spending and inefficiency. And because of the rushed spending, I’m sure the move will increase corruption.

    • @Laser@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      15
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      I think the Spanish just need to get more creative with their spending or rather the accounting of their spending.

      Edit: I’m more forgiving towards Spain for not meeting their goals than other nations because they seem to actually be improving the lives of their citizens, not just austerity bullshit.

    • @grte@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      8
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      They don’t need a reason, really. 5% of GDP is moronic, the number alone is reason enough to pass. Not 5% of the national budget. 5% of GDP. Insane.

    • @BakerBagel@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      171 day ago

      Spain has to deal with millions of pensioners from across Europe retiring there. Germany was complaining anout the drag on it’s economy when hundreds of thousands of working age Syrians came into the county during the 2010’s. Spain has to spend billions of euros every year caring for residents who don’t work, need extra medical care, and displace actual working people. Their economy is incredibly weak as is, they can’t justify spending 3x what they currently are on their military.

      • Ice
        link
        fedilink
        English
        223 hours ago

        Every European nation has to deal with waves of retirees leaving the work force. It’s no excuse. The general solution is increasing retirement age & per capita productivity whilst cutting down on government spending in other areas unless they fancy debt financing. Different GDP strengths is exactly why it’s a % goal rather than an absolute amount to keep things fair.

        • @BakerBagel@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1423 hours ago

          I’m not talking about Spanish workers retiring. I’m talking about English and German pensioners moving to Spain to retire. Spain and Greece have become to Florida and Arizona of Europe where they are stuck picking up the tab for people who never contributed to the local economy and are now draining it of resources. The only reason Greece meets their NATO obligations is because they are in an arms race with Turkey. It’s one thing to care for your elderly parents when they start to get older. It’s an entirely different matter when all of a sudden you are expected to care for some elderly couple that you have never met before.

          • Ice
            link
            fedilink
            English
            821 hours ago

            where they are stuck picking up the tab for people who never contributed to the local economy and are now draining it of resources

            Pensions in the EU are entirely different from how it works in the US. I don’t know how it is there, but here it is the nation you worked in that coughs up the pension money. Additionally, from what I’ve heard from retirees who did move to Spain, they have to pay income tax on their pensions to the Spanish government which means that these people would actually be contributing to the state coffers similarly to someone who was working. So, in other words you have money coming in from abroad, being contributed in taxes and spent on goods & services locally, boosting the economy.

            Besides, the people who can afford to move abroad for retirement usually are the wealthier sort, so not the burden you make it out to be.

    • @koper@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      221 day ago

      It’s an absolutely massive amount of money. And it’s not temporary while there’s a war in Ukraine, it’s indefinitely. All because Trump pressured the rest of NATO and wants more money going to his buddies in the weapons industry.

      Even without the US, European NATO countries already spend more than Russia and China (sources from 2024 and 2025). Just how much more should it get?

      • @scarabic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        116 hours ago

        All because Trump pressured the rest of NATO and wants more money they signed an agreement promising to do so.

  • @glaber@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    111 day ago

    Good, I wish NATO would disintegrate and European defence return to the competences of the European Union. I don’t want my taxes to benefit the United States neither economically nor strategically. They’ve proven time and time again they want to go it alone. They want to be bosses of the world and everyone to answer to them. Fuck them.

    • @Laser@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      61 day ago

      Good, I wish NATO would disintegrate and European defence return to the competences of the European Union.

      “Return”? It was never really there.

      I don’t want my taxes to benefit the United States neither economically nor strategically.

      The 5% are not a membership fee that goes to the US. What the US most often got out of NATO was that they defined the standards and requirements, which at some point required American IP and American products to fulfill those. But in the end, the leverage they had was their huge investment in NATO that also benefited other nations; once the American investments end, other nations will fill that void (hopefully).

      Restricting such an alliance to the EU would rule out members like Canada, for example

      • @glaber@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        113 hours ago

        “Return” or “go” my general message is the same. The Western Union was a precursor to the Western European Union, which existed for a bit over 50 years and was oficially fully dissolved into the EU in 2011. It predated NATO and was a fully European military alliance made for Europe by Europe. I wish we could pick up that torch. I’m of course not opposed to military cooperation with other countries (like Canada), but a mutual-defense clause that includes the US is a no go for me.