Kade Jaarsma
Published 3 May 2024
Donald Trump, the Republican nominee for president of the United States, has claimed that Russia should do what it wants to NATO states that do not meet defence budgets. He has a point. On Wednesday, February 15, 2024, the former president stated, “If they’re [NATO nations] not going to pay, we’re not going to protect.” Since WW1, the west has placed our military hope in the hands of fluctuating American foreign policy. Western states must not put the security of their nations in the hands of American octogenarians whose opinions on foreign policy come and go like the tide.
NATO states have made a commitment to spend 2% of their national GDP on defence spending. On February 14, 2024, the NATO secretary general stated that 18 out of 31 NATO states are expected to hit the 2% threshold by years end, which is an increase from 11 out of 31 states in 2023. However, the United States is still the chief driver of military support to NATO. With an increasingly fragile American political landscape, its monopoly on military power in NATO is concerning.
The American political landscape is the most polar American system in recent memory. As a result of this, candidates are being elected that are more radical than at any other time in the 21st century. This uncertainty leads to concern for other western nations. Power has never been in more unstable hands in the United States, which is a terrifying thought for western nations that rely on a steady American influence.
A prevailing thought in the Western world since WW2 is to keep the USA deeply involved in the security of Western European states. The collective security clause in NATO has accomplished this. As a result of this policy, NATO states have become incredibly reliant on the United States to protect them from aggressors. Dependence on America has deeply weakened western states, and these countries must soon be able to protect themselves if the former president’s words stand true.
In his peer-reviewed paper, Leonard Schuette claims that the 2% threshold is foolish for three reasons. Firstly, states like Greece have increased their defence spending as a percentage of GDP, but this does not result in an increased military output due to their “contracting economy.” Secondly, Schuette claims that the notion of increased military spending being tied to increased NATO capabilities is false because defence spending does not mean increased weapons capacity. Finally, Schuette says that increased military spending does not correlate to participation in coalitions to fight aggressors. While these claims are grounded in fact, it is essential that NATO presents a unified front against aggressor states. Increasing military spending across the board shows the world that NATO is a strong alliance, with or without American support.
In the face of extreme uncertainty within the American political landscape, the rest of the west must band together. With the United States contributing a vast 70% of defence spending, there is an impetus on the rest of the west to increase defence output so as not to become reliant on American support. If we are to take Donald Trump’s words seriously, our future liberties may depend on it.
Comments