Blog Post

Trump, NATO and European defence spending

US President-Elect Donald Trump made critical statements about low European defence spending during the election campaign - signaling an expectation that Europe should contribute more to the cost of its security. Indeed, most European NATO members have spending well below the 2% target that NATO membership entails. Reaching this target could cost the EU27 NATO members 96 billion USD per year.

By: Date: November 15, 2016 European Macroeconomics & GovernanceGlobal Economics & Governance Tags & Topics

In the aftermath of Donald Trump’s election, European defence spending has come into focus. During the campaign, President-Elect Trump’s stance on NATO and the US contribution to its funding was persistently critical.

Indeed, Trump has called for a major rethink on NATO: “We pay, number one, a totally disproportionate share of NATO. We’re spending the biggest, the lion share’s paid for by us, disproportionate to other countries.”

NATO membership comes with financial obligations. Members have to contribute to the organisation’s core budget (calculations rely on gross national income). More importantly, they are also expected to meet a defence spending target of 2% of GDP but most NATO members have long failed to reach this level.

Table 1 displays defence spending to GDP per country over the time period 2009-2016.

Table 1 – Defence expenditures as percentage of GDP (based on 2010 prices), expected defence expenditures in 2016 and “2% target” defence expenditures in 2016.

* Data do not include pensions. ** based on 2010 prices.

Source: the above table was created using time series computed by NATO. We used the last press release on defence expenditures:  http://bru.gl/2fcxLKJ.

Only five countries out of the 28 NATO members were above the 2% target in 2015: Estonia, Greece, Poland, the United Kingdom and the United States. France spent less than 1.8% of its GDP on defence in 2015; Italy and Germany less than 1.2%. However, it is worth noting a shifting global trend amongst the NATO countries: after six years of decreasing defence expenditures, NATO estimates that 18 of the 28 members will increase their defence spending in 2016 (mainly due to the refugee crisis and fears over a potential Russian threat). Nevertheless, most NATO members will remain below the 2% target in 2016.

Donald Trump’s statements call into question the security guarantee that the US has offered European countries through NATO, especially if the 2% targets are not reached. We therefore also calculate the potential rise in defence spending for NATO members who wish to increase spending to the 2% target. In total, the 21 EU27 countries which are also NATO members would need to spend 96 billion US dollars annually more than they currently do.

Chart 1 – Defence expenditures as percentage of GDP (based on 2010 prices)

Source: the above chart was created using time series computed by NATO. We used the last press release on defence expenditures: http://bru.gl/2gde2ir.

artboard-1

 

 


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

View comments
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Silvia Merler

The American opioid epidemics

What’s at stake: The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) declares that the country is “in the midst of an unprecedented opioid epidemic”. Since 1999, the rate of overdose deaths involving opioids - including prescription pain relievers and heroin - nearly quadrupled. We review contributions looking at the economic drivers and implications of this phenomenon.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: March 27, 2017
Read about event More on this topic

Upcoming Event

Apr
10-11
16:00

Towards EU-MENA shared prosperity

The second edition of the "Platform for Advanced & Emerging Economies Policy Dialogue" will discuss global supply chains, energy and security.

Speakers: Karim El Aynaoui, Larbi Jaidi, Simone Tagliapietra, Guntram B. Wolff, Giacomo Luciani, Maria Demertzis, Marion Jansen and Rania Al-Mashat Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

Guntram B. Wolff

Europe should lead the way with multilateralism

Despite the unique partnership with the USA, Europe needs to reflect on its place in an unstable world. Especially if the US Administration moves towards protectionism, the EU will need to build and deepen relationships with other partners.

By: Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: March 16, 2017
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

Trump’s energy policy: America first, climate last?

This event seeked to discuss the potential way forward for the US energy and climate policy, and its implications for both global energy markets and global climate change mitigation efforts.

Speakers: Kristine Berzina, Tim Boersma, Connie Hedegaard, Simone Tagliapietra and Zhang Xumin Topic: Energy & Climate Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: March 7, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

photo2016

NAFTA in play: How President Trump could reshape trade in North America

How will the story of NAFTA unfold under the Trump presidency? Uri Dadush examines three possible scenarios and provides an overview of the policy implications for the various trading partners of the United States.

By: Uri Dadush Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: March 1, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Simone Tagliapietra

Trump’s Energy Policy: America First, Climate Last?

What will the new US administration mean for the fight against global warming? Climate change is not even mentioned in the ‘‘America First Energy Plan’’, and Simone Tagliapietra fears a reversal of recent positive steps.

By: Simone Tagliapietra Topic: Energy & Climate Date: February 28, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

dsc_0809

The Mexican automotive industry and Trump’s USA

Trade with Mexico is a controversial topic for the new US administration. And the automotive sector is emblematic of Trump’s promise to bring manufacturing jobs back to the USA. But a look at the numbers reveals risks in any shake-up of cross-border trade. 22% of US automotive exports to Mexico are later reimported as part of cars “made in Mexico”. And disrupting production chains could have repercussions around the world.

By: Filippo Biondi Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 27, 2017
Read article More by this author

Blog Post

IMG_1985

The Trump market rally conundrum

What’s at stake: Since Donald Trump’s election in November, the US stock market has been on an unabated rally. The Dow Jones Industrial Average powered through the 20,000 mark for the first time in history. POTUS has been quick in using this financial bonanza as prima facie evidence of his early accomplishments. However, several commentators question the link between Trump’s unorthodox economic policy pledges, the stock market rally, and future growth prospects.

By: Alessio Terzi Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation, Global Economics & Governance Date: February 27, 2017
Read article Download PDF

Policy Brief

Screen Shot 2017-02-17 at 16.42.38

Europe in a new world order

In this paper the authors explore what the EU’s strategic reaction should be to US diminishing giant policies, and the EU’s role in a world of declining hegemony and shifting balances

By: Maria Demertzis, André Sapir and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Global Economics & Governance Date: February 17, 2017
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Zsolt Darvas
DSC_0798
dsc_1000

The Brexit bill: uncertainties in the estimate of EU pension and sickness insurance liabilities

Pension and sickness insurance liabilities for EU staff could be an especially contentious part of negotiations on an EU-UK financial settlement: the “Brexit bill”. This post looks behind the calculation of the alleged cost of pension benefits and concludes that it may be less than half of what it seems.

By: Zsolt Darvas, Konstantinos Efstathiou and Inês Goncalves Raposo Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: February 17, 2017
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Zsolt Darvas
DSC_0798
dsc_1000

The UK’s Brexit bill: could EU assets partially offset liabilities?

The ‘Brexit bill’ is likely to be one of the most contentious aspects of the upcoming negotiations. But estimates so far focus largely on the EU costs and liabilities that the UK will have to buy its way out of. What about the EU’s assets? The UK will surely get a share of those, and they could total €153.7bn.

By: Zsolt Darvas, Konstantinos Efstathiou and Inês Goncalves Raposo Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: February 14, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Marek Dabrowski

The EU should not retaliate against Trump’s protectionism

If the US moves ahead with Republican plans to introduce a border adjustment tax, the EU will need to decide on its response. Marek Dabrowski argues that the EU would be unwise to retaliate with its own anti-import policies: the border adjustment tax would be difficult to implement and damaging to the global trade order. Instead the EU should build a broad coalition of allies to defend free trade.

By: Marek Dabrowski Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 9, 2017
Load more posts