NATO leaders agree to hike military spending and restate 'ironclad commitment' to collective defense
CORRECTS SPELLING TO HAGUE NOT HAUGE U.S. President Donald Trump arrives to be officially greeted by NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and Netherland's Prime Minister Dick Schoof at the NATO Summit in The Hague, Netherlands on Wednesday, June 25, 2025. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press via AP)
By MIKE CORDER, SYLVIE CORBET, MOLLY QUELL and LORNE COOK
NATO leaders agreed on Wednesday on a massive hike in defense spending after pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump, and expressed their 'ironclad commitment' to come to each other's aid if attacked.
The 32 leaders endorsed a final summit statement saying: 'Allies commit to invest 5% of GDP annually on core defense requirements as well as defense- and security-related spending by 2035 to ensure our individual and collective obligations.'
Spain had already officially announced that it cannot meet the target, and others have voiced reservations, but the investment pledge includes a review of spending in 2029 — after the next U.S. presidential elections — to monitor progress and reassess the security threat posed by Russia.
The leaders also underlined their 'ironclad commitment' to NATO's collective security guarantee – 'that an attack on one is an attack on all.' Ahead of the summit, Trump had again raised doubts over whether the United States would defend its allies.
The show of unity vindicated NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte's billing of the summit as 'transformational,' even though it papered over divisions.
"Together, allies have laid the foundations for a stronger, fairer and more lethal NATO,' Rutte told reporters after chairing the meeting in The Hague. 'This will fuel a quantum leap in our collective defense.'
The spending hike requires each countries to spend billions of dollars. It comes as the United States — NATO's biggest-spending member — shifts its attention away from Europe to focus on security priorities elsewhere, notably in the Middle East and Indo-Pacific.
But ahead of the meeting, Spain announced that it would not be able to reach the target by the new 2035 deadline, calling it 'unreasonable.' Belgium signaled that it would not get there either, and Slovakia said it reserves the right to decide its own defense spending.
Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez stood conspicuously aside from other leaders in the summit family photo.
Many European countries face major economic challenges, and Trump's global tariff war could make it even harder for America's allies to reach their targets. Some countries are already squeezing welfare and foreign aid spending to channel extra funds into their military budgets.
On Tuesday, Trump complained that 'there's a problem with Spain. Spain is not agreeing, which is very unfair to the rest of them, frankly.' He has also criticized Canada as 'a low payer.' In 2018, a NATO summit during Trump's first term unraveled due to a dispute over defense spending.
Other countries closer to the borders of Russia and Ukraine — Poland, the three Baltic states and Nordic countries — have committed to the 5% goal, as have NATO's European heavyweights Britain, France, Germany and the Netherlands.
In their statement, the leaders said they were united 'in the face of profound security threats and challenges, in particular the long-term threat posed by Russia.' It had been feared that Trump would would object to that assessment, which European governments need to justify higher spending.
Trump has been reluctant to support Ukraine in its war against Russia's full-scale invasion.
'We stand by Ukraine in its pursuit of peace and will continue to support Ukraine on its irreversible path to NATO membership,' Rutte said. The Trump administration has vetoed Ukraine's bid to join NATO for the foreseeable future.
Finnish President Alexander Stubb said the agreement "is a big win, I think, for both President Trump and I think it's also a big win for Europe.' He told reporters that 'we're witnessing the birth of a new NATO, which means a more balanced NATO.'
He said it would take nations 'back to the defense expenditure levels of the Cold War.' NATO countries started to cut their military budgets in safer times after the Berlin Wall collapsed in 1989.
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer threw his weight behind the hike, declaring, ''This is the moment to unite, for Europe to make fundamental shift in its posture and for NATO to meet this challenge head-on.'
In a fresh take on Trump's MAGA movement, Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda said: 'We should choose a motto, 'make NATO great again.''
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 just three a decade ago.
In The Hague, the allies endorsed a major revamp of their spending targets. They upped the ante for what NATO calls 'core defense spending' to 3.5%, while changing how it's counted to include providing military support to Ukraine.
To hit Trump's 5% demand, the deal set a second target of 1.5% of GDP for a broader range of defense-related spending, such as improving roads, bridges, ports and airfields so that armies can deploy more quickly, countering cyber and hybrid attack measures, or preparing societies to deal with future conflicts.
'This declaration is historic. We are 32 allies supporting that ambition, which is huge,' said Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre. 'We have been struggling to get above 2% and now we said 3.5%, which is necessary in order to reach our capabilities.'
Extra funds will also be needed should the Trump administration announce a draw-down of forces in Europe, where around 84,000 U.S. troops are based, leaving European allies to plug any security gaps. The Pentagon is expected to announce its intentions in coming months.
Asked why Trump has suggested that the new spending target should not apply to the United States, Rutte said: 'The U.S. is more or less there,' in terms of the 5% benchmark.
Beyond Trump's demands, European allies and Canada have steeply ramped up defense spending out of concern about the threated posed by Russia. Several countries are concerned that Russia could carry out an attack on NATO territory by the end of the decade. Hungary is not one of them, though.
'I think Russia is not strong enough to represent a real threat to us. We are far stronger,' said Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, fielding questions from reporters, leaning back with his hands thrust into his pockets. Orbán is considered Russian President Vladimir Putin's closest ally in Europe.
———
Jill Lawless in London contributed to this report.
© Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Japan Times
43 minutes ago
- Japan Times
NATO spending deal creates new standard — for Indo-Pacific allies
NATO countries have pledged to spend big on defense, and while this move may largely appear to be a European issue, its consequences could ultimately play out in the Indo-Pacific. Members of the world's largest military alliance on Wednesday agreed on a spending target of 5% of gross domestic product by 2035, effectively enabling the U.S. military to shift more strategic attention and military resources to the region as it zeroes in on containing China. But Washington's aspired pivot to the Indo-Pacific will likely only be incremental and drawn out, experts warn, as Europe moves slowly amid political fragmentation, substantial defense-industrial bottlenecks and ongoing dependence on U.S. logistical support. The two-day summit in the Netherlands, which was skipped by three leaders of NATO's four Indo-Pacific partner countries, including Japan, had one major takeaway: securing the allies' agreement to the new 5% target. The deal will see alliance members ramp up defense-related spending to a total of 5% of GDP by 2035, with 3.5% dedicated to core needs such as troops and weapons and 1.5% to security-related investments in cybersecurity, infrastructure and other areas. The hike will be a steep increase from NATO's current 2% target. No alliance member currently hits 5% — not even the United States at 3.4% — though Poland has tracked just over 4% of GDP. Pleasing Trump The move was seen by many as existential for the alliance in terms of keeping the United States engaged in NATO while enabling the allies to modernize their armed forces and improve their military capabilities to deter Russia. In doing so, the summit also seemed to help change long-held American perceptions of unfair European burden-sharing that have always bedeviled NATO and cast doubt on the credibility of the U.S. security guarantee. U.S. President Donald Trump was the first to express this, suggesting NATO was no longer a rip-off. 'It's a monumental win for the United States because we were carrying much more than our fair share. It was quite unfair actually. But this is a big win for Europe and for actually Western civilization.' France's President Emmanuel Macron (far left), NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte (left), Italy's Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni (center left), Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer (center), Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (center right), Poland's Prime Minister Donald Tusk (right) and Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz during a NATO summit in The Hague on Wednesday | Pool / via REUTERS Given that NATO summits are mainly about displaying unity, analysts such as Paal Sigurd Hilde, from the Norwegian Institute for Defense Studies, point out that this year's gathering was primarily about Trump and keeping him happy. 'Having a short summit with lots of pomp and circumstance and limited substance for the leaders was clearly aimed at pleasing Trump at the same time as limiting the chance Trump would have had to cause havoc and scandal,' the expert said. 'In this sense, the summit was clearly successful: Trump is happy and U.S. commitment is secured.' As a result, there is a growing expectation that leading European powers such as Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Poland will take on a greater security role. Creative diplomacy But while the spending agreement was framed as historic, NATO had to resort to traditional creative diplomacy to achieve consensus, particularly after Spain threatened to opt out, in a reflection of an alliance trying to hold itself together under pressure, experts say. The language that NATO leaders approved stresses that 'allies commit' to the 5% target, rather than 'we commit' — a subtle but important linguistic tweak that gives Spain, and possibly others, the political flexibility to spend slightly less so long as it still meets NATO's capability targets for individual nations, said James Black, deputy director of defense at Rand Europe, part of the nonprofit Rand Corp. Gorana Grgic, a senior researcher in Euro-Atlantic Security at ETH Zurich's Center for Security Studies, even argues that consensus was achieved largely by deferring the specifics. NATO agreed on the 5% figure but left the details, especially around the 1.5% nontraditional portion, to be determined on a case-by-case basis, Grgic said. 'This vagueness allowed flexibility while still securing headline agreement.' Nevertheless, with an agreement now in place, alliance planners and individual allies can apply constant pressure on other member states to move closer to the 5% target. Setting a new standard This means the agreement could have knock-on effects for Japan and other U.S. allies in the Indo-Pacific, which Washington has said must also meet a new 'global standard' of spending 5% of GDP on defense. 'The U.S. will almost certainly use the latest NATO deal to up defense spending pressure on the IP4 countries (Australia, Japan, South Korea and New Zealand),' said Nate Fischler, Asia-Pacific analyst at U.S.-based geopolitics and intelligence firm RANE. 'A standard for U.S. allies has now been established, and Washington will want the IP4 to meet said standard.' U.S. President Donald Trump, flanked by U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth (left) and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, during a news conference at the NATO summit in The Hague on Wednesday | AFP-jiji While countries like Japan and Australia have already pushed back, Washington is likely to keep asking for 'more equitable' burden-sharing as it wants regional allies to play a greater role in countering China. The U.S. has long indicated a desire to free up forces and resources to focus more on the Indo-Pacific theater to deter any future aggression from China, and this is no different under the Trump administration. In this context, the NATO spending deal marks an important step in this direction as it will strengthen Europe's own capabilities to counter Russia, including against Ukraine. However, experts warn that this transition will take time as Europe is likely to move slowly for a number of reasons, including political fragmentation and their short-to-mid-term dependency on a number of cutting-edge U.S. technologies and capabilities. 'The actual pace will depend on how quickly European allies can credibly assume more of the deterrence burden,' Fischler said, noting that Washington cannot yet meaningfully disengage from the transatlantic theater. Pivot will take time Any intensification of U.S. focus on China will be incremental, constrained by competing obligations and assurances that regional allies as well as front-line partners like Taiwan and the Philippines are willing and able to share the load, he added. It will also depend on whether Washington can maintain its focus on Asia and avoid being strategically distracted in the Middle East or elsewhere. Rand Europe's Black has a similar view, arguing that in the short-term, the increase in European defense spending and capabilities will not radically change the equation for U.S. defense planners. What it will do is enable the Pentagon to continue shifting its focus toward deterring China, especially in terms of how it thinks about posturing its air and maritime forces, and its high-value assets. Longer-term, a more capable and resilient European pillar within NATO would be better able to deter and, if necessary, defeat Russia without needing as much American support, Black said. This would reduce the risk that the U.S. might be pulled into a global conflict involving simultaneous threats from Russia, China and Iran in different parts of the world. That said, not all experts are convinced that drawing clear lines between European and Indo-Pacific allies' security responsibilities is the best way forward. They argue that such an approach would fail to utilize the force-multiplying power of allies working across regions. 'The U.S. would be stronger making its allies work cross-regionally rather than in a regionally-siloed way,' Grgic said. After all, Washington's rivals are 'connecting across theaters' as highlighted in the deepening cooperation between Russia and China and Russia and North Korea, she added.
NHK
44 minutes ago
- NHK
CIA chief: Iran nuclear sites 'severely damaged' by US strikes
The head of the CIA says "credible intelligence" suggests Iran's nuclear program has been "severely damaged" by the recent US strikes and could take "years" to rebuild. In a statement on Wednesday, CIA Director John Ratcliffe cited "new intelligence from a historically reliable and accurate source/method that several key Iranian nuclear facilities were destroyed and would have to be rebuilt over the course of years." CNN and other US media outlets have reported that an early intelligence assessment indicated that US airstrikes did not destroy the core components of Iran's nuclear program, and likely only set it back by months. US President Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed that Iran's nuclear program has been "totally obliterated."
NHK
44 minutes ago
- NHK
Trump says US-Iran nuclear talks may happen next week
US President Donald Trump emphasized that the fighting between Israel and Iran has ended, and indicated plans to hold talks with Iranian officials next week to discuss Tehran's nuclear program. Trump said at a news conference on Wednesday: " We may sign an agreement. I don't know. To me, I don't think it's that necessary. The only thing we'd be asking for is what we were asking for before about we want no nuclear." The talks would follow US strikes on three nuclear sites in Iran on Sunday. A leaked US intelligence analysis found that the core components of Iran's nuclear program were likely not destroyed -- only set back by several months. Trump has dismissed those reports and repeated claims that the targets were "obliterated." He maintained: "We assessed that the American strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities has set back Iran's ability to develop nuclear weapons for many years to come. This achievement can continue indefinitely if Iran does not get access to nuclear material, which it won't." Trump also justified the strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities by citing the atomic bombings in the final days of World War Two. He said: "That hit ended the war. I don't want to use an example of Hiroshima, I don't want to use an example of Nagasaki, but that was essentially the same thing." Trump made the remarks while attending a meeting of NATO leaders in The Hague.
