UK PM Says Britain Commits To NATO 5% Spending Target
United Kingdom:
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced Monday that Britain was committed to spending five percent of its economic output on defence, in line with a pledge set to be announced by NATO at a summit in the Netherlands.
In a statement on the eve of the start of the western group's two-day get-together in The Hague, Starmer said his government would aim to hit the pledge by 2035.
"We must navigate this era of radical uncertainty with agility, speed and a clear-eyed sense of the national interest to deliver security for working people and keep them safe," Starmer said.
"This is an opportunity to deepen our commitment to NATO and drive greater investment in the nation's wider security and resilience," he added.
The UK government said it expects NATO's 32 allies to agree to spend at least 3.5 percent of GDP on core military needs by 2035, and 1.5 on broader security-related items like cybersecurity and infrastructure.
The compromise deal aims to placate US President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly called for America's allies to dramatically ramp up defence spending.
NATO chief Mark Rutte has said that spending five percent on defence and security is essential to deter Russian aggression.
On Monday, he called the pledge a "quantum leap that is ambitious, historic and fundamental to securing our future".
Starmer had in February pledged to increase core UK defence spending to 2.5 percent of GDP by 2027, and three percent sometime in the early 2030s.
pdh/jwp/gv
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
43 minutes ago
- Mint
Oil Majors Cut Back Iraq Personnel as Mideast Tensions Rise
(Bloomberg) -- BP Plc, TotalEnergies SE and Eni SpA have reduced staff at oil fields in Iraq as a precaution, as tensions escalate in the region. The temporary move by the three European oil majors has not impacted production, according to a statement from the Basrah Oil Co., the state-owned oil and gas operator in the area. The companies work on some of Iraq's largest production assets. The staff drawdown underscores how quickly regional instability can impact global energy supply chains even when direct threats to production are not imminent. Iraq, OPEC's second-largest producer after Saudi Arabia, was pumping about 4.1 million barrels of oil per day as of May, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. 'As a precautionary measure, BP has made the decision to relocate some staff from Iraq,' a company spokesperson said in an emailed statement. Earlier Monday, Eni said it had reduced staff at Iraq's Zubair oil field 'as a precautionary measure.' Total declined to comment. BP manages the giant Rumaila field, one of the world's biggest, jointly with Iraq and PetroChina Co. The evacuation has not affected the production process, with Iraqi personnel fully managing the operations and monitoring assets in cooperation with remote operators, according to Basrah Oil Co. Chinese companies managing fields in southern Iraq have not evacuated staff and 'work continues smoothly,' Basrah Oil Co. said. Russian firm Lukoil's personnel levels in Iraq are also unchanged. --With assistance from Alberto Brambilla and Francois de Beaupuy. (Updates with BP comment in the fourth paragraph.) More stories like this are available on
The Print
an hour ago
- The Print
Iran is learning the hard way that being a nuclear threshold state isn't safe anymore
Hours later, Iran responded with a missile strike on US forces at the Al Udeid air base in Qatar, causing no damage or casualties. The move appears to have been a choreographed exercise, reminiscent of Iran's retaliation in January 2020 after Quds Force General Qassem Soleimani was killed in Iraq. Meanwhile, Trump has declared that 'a full and complete ceasefire' will be in effect shortly, though neither Iran nor Israel has confirmed it yet. And Trump did. In the early hours of 22 June, the US targeted three nuclear locations in Iran: Fordow, Natanz (another enrichment site), and Isfahan (a uranium conversion site). After declaring that the nuclear sites had been 'totally and completely obliterated,' Trump added, 'NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE.' Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is delighted that his gamble has paid off. After decimating Israel's proxies—Hamas and Hezbollah—and substantially weakening Iranian air defences through airstrikes last year, Netanyahu was convinced this was the most opportune moment to target Iran's nuclear and missile programmes. The challenge was to get US President Donald Trump to join him in the exercise. Iran's nuclear programme—a long journey Iran's nuclear journey has been long and tortuous. It began under the Shah's regime in the 1950s with a civil nuclear cooperation agreement signed with the US, and the first research reactor went critical in 1967. Since then, the nuclear programme has been seen as a symbol of scientific progress and a source of nationalist pride. Iran became an original state party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1970 when it entered into force, placing all its activities under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards. The Shah embarked on an ambitious civil nuclear power generation programme, signing cooperation agreements with Germany and France. Siemens began work on the Bushehr power reactors (2×1200 MW) in 1975 but later withdrew. The plants finally went online in 2011 with Russian assistance. After the Islamic Revolution, nuclear activity came to a standstill as the clerical regime saw it as a source of Western influence. However, sometime in the 1990s, opinions changed, and nuclear research activities were gradually revived. By then, nuclear controls had tightened, curbing exports of enrichment and reprocessing technologies, though these remained permitted under the NPT. Iran revived its civilian nuclear power projects and also began establishing a clandestine enrichment facility. It received assistance from the AQ Khan network as well as from China to develop capabilities across the entire nuclear fuel cycle. In parallel, Iran began developing missiles. In 2002, nuclear activity was exposed by a group of Iranian exiles. It became clear that regular IAEA inspections had failed to detect the clandestine programme. Negotiations began in 2003, initially with the three European powers and later including the US. These collapsed when President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took over, and starting in 2006, Iran was subjected to successive UN Security Council sanctions. By this time, Iran had established its first enrichment facility at Natanz. Around that time, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei issued a fatwa against nuclear weapons, describing them as un-Islamic. The general assessment is that while the fatwa was respected, Iran pursued the technical capabilities to become a nuclear threshold state. As recently as 26 March, the US Director of National Intelligence stated in an official briefing to Congress: 'The Intelligence Community continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorised the nuclear weapons programme that he suspended in 2003.' This assessment has also been affirmed by Rafael Grossi, Director General of the IAEA. Also read: Iran's brutal regime is facing a reckoning. Consequences of US attack will go beyond Tehran Can Iran remain a nuclear threshold state? In 2009, a hitherto secret underground enrichment facility at Fordow was exposed. Israel and the US cooperated in the 2008 Stuxnet covert operation, which destroyed a large number of centrifuges before the Iranians discovered the computer malware in 2010. Thereafter, Iran expanded its uranium enrichment programme, leading to talks that culminated in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015. Under the JCPOA, Iran accepted rigorous IAEA inspections and permanent camera monitoring. However, beginning in 2019—one year after the US withdrew from the JCPOA—Iran began scaling back its adherence to additional inspection measures, observing only the basic safeguards mandated by the NPT. On 31 May, an IAEA report revealed that Iran had rapidly increased its stockpile of 60% enriched uranium to 408 kg, enough to be further enriched relatively quickly to weapons-grade (90%) levels, and sufficient for approximately 8–10 bombs. On 12 June, the IAEA declared—for the first time in over 20 years—that Iran was non-compliant with its nuclear obligations under the NPT. Israel, which is not a party to the NPT, struck on 13 June, and the US followed on 22 June. All major nuclear sites—including the research reactor in Tehran, enrichment facilities at Natanz and Fordow, the heavy water reactor at Arak, the fuel fabrication and research reactor at Isfahan, and the suspected military site at Parchin—have been repeatedly targeted. There are questions about the extent of damage to the centrifuges, particularly at the underground sites at Fordow and Mt. Kolang Gaz La near Natanz. The whereabouts of the 408 kg of 60% enriched uranium also remain a matter of speculation. IAEA monitoring has not detected enhanced radioactivity around the sites. Further details will only emerge after the IAEA resumes inspections, contingent on renewed talks between Iran and the US and the prospect of a new deal. Meanwhile, Iran's leaders are likely to conclude that remaining a nuclear threshold state is a dangerous position, especially when the adversary is a nuclear-armed state. The Ukraine war and the use of nuclear sabre-rattling further underscore this lesson. Other countries in Asia are also likely to draw their own conclusions, revealing the growing fragility of the global nuclear regime. Rakesh Sood is a retired diplomat who served as Ambassador to Afghanistan, Nepal, and France. He also served as India's first Ambassador – Permanent Representative to the Conference on Disarmament at the United Nations in Geneva and later as PM's Special Envoy for Disarmament and Nonproliferation. He tweets @rakeshnms. Views are personal. (Edited by Prashant)
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Leaders gather for NATO summit on Tuesday amid disagreements
US President Donald Trump and his NATO counterparts are due to gather Tuesday for a summit that could unite the world's biggest security organisation around a new defense spending pledge or widen divisions among the 32 allies. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte held a press conference ahead of a NATO summit, in The Hague.(Reuters) Just a week ago, things had seemed rosy. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte was optimistic the European members and Canada would commit to invest at least as much of their economic growth on defense as the United States does for the first time. Then Spain rejected the new NATO target for each country to spend 5% of its gross domestic product on defense needs, calling it 'unreasonable.' Trump also insists on that figure. The alliance operates on a consensus that requires the backing of all 32 members. The following day, Trump said the U.S. should not have to respect the goal. 'I don't think we should, but I think they should,' he said. Trump lashed out at Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez's government, saying: 'NATO is going to have to deal with Spain. Spain's been a very low payer." He also criticized Canada as 'a low payer.' Spain was the lowest spender in the alliance last year, directing less than 2% of its GDP on defense expenditure, while Canada was spending 1.45%, according to NATO figures. Also read: Rutte aims to steer NATO summit around Trump turbulence Then Trump ordered the bombing of nuclear installations in Iran. In 2003, the US-led war on Iraq deeply divided NATO, as France and Germany led opposition to the attack, while Britain and Spain joined the coalition. European allies and Canada also want Ukraine to be at the top of the summit agenda, but they are wary that Trump might not want President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to steal the limelight. The two-day summit in The Hague involves an informal dinner Tuesday and one working session Wednesday morning. A very short summit statement has been drafted to ensure the meeting is not derailed by fights over details and wording. Indeed, much about this NATO summit is brief, even though ripples could be felt for years. Founded in 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation was formed by 12 nations to counter the threat to security in Europe posed by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, notably via a strong U.S. presence on the continent. Dealing with Moscow is in its DNA. Keeping the peace outside the Euro-Atlantic area is not. NATO's ranks have grown to 32 countries since the Washington Treaty was signed 75 years ago. Sweden joined last year, worried by an increasingly aggressive Russia. NATO's collective security guarantee — Article 5 of the treaty — underpins its credibility. It's a political commitment by all countries to come to the aid of any member whose sovereignty or territory might be under attack. Trump has suggested he is committed to that pledge, but he has also sowed doubt about his intentions. He has said the US intends to remain a member of the alliance. The United States is NATO's most powerful member. It spends much more on defence than any other ally and far outweighs its partners in terms of military muscle. Washington has traditionally driven the agenda but has stepped back under US nuclear arsenal provides strategic deterrence against would-be day-to-day work is led by Rutte, a former Dutch prime minister. As its top civilian official, he chairs almost weekly meetings of ambassadors in the North Atlantic Council at its Brussels headquarters. He chairs other 'NACs' at ministerial and leader levels. Rutte runs NATO headquarters, trying to foster consensus and to speak on behalf of all members. NATO's military headquarters is based nearby in Mons, Belgium. It is always run by a top US officer. Ukraine's role at the summit is unclear With Trump demanding greater defense spending, it's unclear what role Ukraine will play at the summit. Zelenskyy has been invited, but it's unclear whether he will have a seat at NATO's table, although he may take part in Tuesday's dinner. Russia's war in Ukraine usually dominates such meetings. More broadly, NATO itself is not arming Ukraine. As an organisation, it possesses no weapons of any kind. Collectively, it provides only non-lethal support — fuel, combat rations, medical supplies, body armor, and equipment to counter drones or mines. But individually, members do send arms. European allies provided 60% of the military support that Ukraine received in 2024. NATO coordinates those weapons deliveries via a hub on the Polish border and helps organize training for Ukrainian troops. NATO's troop plans A key part of the commitment for allies to defend one another is to deter Russia, or any other adversary, from attacking in the first place. Finland and Sweden joined NATO recently because of this concern. Under NATO's new military plans, 300,000 military personnel would be deployed within 30 days to counter any attack, whether it be on land, at sea, by air or in cyberspace. But experts doubt whether the allies could muster the troop numbers. It's not just about troop and equipment numbers. An adversary would be less likely to challenge NATO if it thought the allies would use the forces it controls. Trump's threats against U.S. allies — including imposing tariffs on them — has weakened that deterrence. Due to high US defense spending over many years, the American armed forces have more personnel and superior weapons but also significant transportation and logistics assets. Other allies are starting to spend more, though. After years of cuts, NATO members committed to ramp up their national defense budgets in 2014 when Russia illegally annexed Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula. After Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the NATO allies agreed to make 2% of GDP the minimum spending level. Last year, 22 countries were expected to hit that target, up from only three a decade ago. In The Hague, the allies were expected to up the ante to 3.5%, plus a further 1.5% for things like improving roads, bridges, ports and airfields or preparing societies to deal with future conflicts. Whether they will now remains an open question.
