Nato leaders agree to hike military spending after pressure from Trump
Nato leaders have agreed on a massive hike in defence spending after pressure from US 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 defence requirements as well as defence- and security-related spending by 2035 to ensure our individual and collective obligations.'
Advertisement
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 to monitor progress and reassess the security threat posed by Russia.
Netherlands Prime Minister Dick Schoof, front row from fifth left, Nato secretary general Mark Rutte, US President Donald Trump, Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan pose with Nato country leaders for a family photo during the Nato summit in The Hague, Netherlands (Ben Stansall/Pool Photo via AP)
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, Mr 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.
Advertisement
The spending pledge sets European allies and Canada on a steep path towards significant military investment.
The spending hike requires each country 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'.
Advertisement
Belgium signalled that it would not get there either, and Slovakia said it reserves the right to decide its own defence spending.
US President Donald Trump, left, and US secretary of state Marco Rubio in The Hague, Netherlands (Brendan Smialowski/Pool Photo via AP)
Many European countries face major economic challenges, and Mr 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, Mr Trump complained that 'there's a problem with Spain. Spain is not agreeing, which is very unfair to the rest of them, frankly'.
Advertisement
He has also criticised Canada as 'a low payer'.
In 2018, a Nato summit during Mr Trump's first term unravelled due to a dispute over defence spending.
But Mr Rutte conceded that 'these are difficult decisions. Let's be honest. I mean, politicians have to make choices in scarcity. And this is not easy'.
But he said: 'given the threat from the Russians, given the international security situation, there is no alternative'.
Advertisement
Other countries closer to the borders of Russia and Ukraine – Poland, the three Baltic states and Nordic countries – have committed to the goal, as have Nato's European heavyweights Britain, France, Germany and the Netherlands.
'This is a big win, I think, for both President Trump and I think it's also a big win for Europe,' Finnish President Alexander Stubb told reporters.
'We're witnessing the birth of a new Nato, which means a more balanced Nato.'
He said it would take nations 'back to the defence expenditure levels of the Cold War'.
Nato countries started to cut their military budgets in safer times after the Berlin Wall collapsed in 1989.
In a fresh take on Mr Trump's Maga movement, Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda 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.
French President Emmanuel Macron speaks during a media conference at the Nato summit in The Hague, Netherlands (Geert Vanden Wijngaert/AP)
In The Hague, the allies endorsed a major revamp of their spending targets.
They upped the ante for what Nato calls 'core defence spending' to 3.5%, while changing how it is counted to include providing military support to Ukraine.
To hit Mr Trump's 5% demand, the deal set a second target of 1.5% of GDP for a broader range of defence-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.
Progress will be reviewed in 2029, after the next US presidential election.
'This declaration is historic. We are 32 allies supporting that ambition, which is huge,' said Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store.
'We have been struggling to get above 2% and now we said 3.5%, which is necessary in order to reach our capabilities.'
Earlier this month, Nato agreed individual purchasing targets for nations to stock up on weapons and military equipment to better defend Europe, the Arctic and the North Atlantic, as part of the US push to ramp up security spending.
📸 Leaders gather for a family photo at the
#NATOsummit
in The Hague 🇳🇱
pic.twitter.com/3Ky9lzlIQ7
— NATO Spokesperson (@NATOpress)
June 25, 2025
Extra funds will also be needed should the Trump administration announce a draw-down of forces in Europe, where around 84,000 US troops are based, leaving European allies to plug any security gaps.
The Pentagon is expected to announce its intentions in coming months.
Beyond Mr Trump's demands, European allies and Canada have steeply ramped up defence spending out of concern about the threat 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 Orban, fielding questions from reporters, leaning back with his hands thrust into his pockets.
Mr Orban is considered Russian President Vladimir Putin's closest ally in Europe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
28 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Starmer's pointless globetrotting proves how irrelevant he is
Sir Keir Starmer clearly finds burnishing his credentials as a statesman on the world stage far more to his liking than dealing with pesky domestic concerns, such as cutting disability benefits and the winter fuel allowance. British prime ministers usually seek solace in endless overseas jamborees once they have first served a lengthy apprenticeship in Downing Street. Tony Blair was well into his third term before taking refuge in foreign junkets as his domestic popularity waned. By contrast, Starmer, who now has the unenviable honour of the lowest net favourability rating on record, has developed the taste for travelling abroad remarkably early in his premiership. Rather than investing effort in rallying support for policies, 'Never-Here Keir' prefers to spend his time hobnobbing with other world leaders. Last week our Prime Minister was missing in action, attending the increasingly irrelevant meeting of G7 leaders in Canada. It was memorable solely for Donald Trump's sensible decision to head for the exit early to attend to the deepening Iran-Israel conflict. Starmer was in The Hague attending the annual get-together of Nato leaders, where he desperately sought to persuade an increasingly sceptical Trump administration that his Government really was committed to spending 5 per cent of GDP on defence by 2035. By that date, Starmer's undistinguished term in office will be a distant memory. And the defence of the realm will not have been improved a jot by the investment in rural broadband and national roadworks that Starmer now claims is a vital part of his plan to increase overall defence spending. A more detailed examination of the Government's defence plans – one that our allies in the Pentagon will be studying closely – is that there will be no new money to increase the number of troops available to fight the wars of the future. Starmer's boast at the Nato summit that the UK would meet the alliance's new spending target of 5 per cent of GDP 'to deepen our commitment to Nato' is nothing more than an elaborate Treasury 'smoke and mirrors' exercise. Even the highly publicised decision to buy 12 F-35A stealth fighters, which can carry tactical nuclear weapons, has been taken at the expense of buying more of the F-35B variant used by the Royal Navy's two 65,000-ton aircraft carriers, thereby severely diminishing their war-fighting capabilities. Nor does Starmer's endless globetrotting appear to have had any noticeable bearing on his ability to influence key events, as was evident during the Trump administration's decision to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities. While Starmer has an unerring habit of making sure he is photographed next to Trump whenever there is a summit photo op, his ability to bring any influence to bear on the Trump administration's decision-making process is negligible. The first Starmer knew that Trump had given the go-ahead for the bombing raid was when he received a telephone call from the US leader at Chequers, after the B-2 stealth bombers were already in the air. It was merely a courtesy call from Trump, not a consultation with a key ally. The fact that Starmer was completely blindsided by Trump's decision to attack Iran is hardly surprising given that David Lammy, his hapless Foreign Secretary, had returned from meeting Trump administration officials earlier that week insisting there was still a 'window of opportunity' to de-escalate the conflict. The bitter truth is that, for all Starmer attempts to ingratiate himself with world leaders, no one is taking him seriously as a statesman. And this is no wonder given his default response when faced with an international crisis is to indulge in legalistic sophistry and equivocation. Starmer's inability to formulate a clear and coherent response when faced with a global crisis was clearly evident from his handling of the Gaza conflict, when he supported Israel's right to defend itself while at the same time backing the imposition of punitive measures against key members of the Israeli government. The prime minister's leadership failings were again in evidence in the aftermath of the US raid on Iran's infrastructure. While insisting that the UK remained opposed to the ayatollahs acquiring nuclear weapons, Starmer could not bring himself to issue a public declaration of support for Trump's decisive action, which has destroyed any hope the Iranians may have entertained of developing nuclear warheads in the near future. The result is that, for all Starmer's grandstanding at global summits, no one is going to take a politician seriously who is quite content to deceive the outside world about the UK's defence commitments, while at the same time being temperamentally incapable of making his mind up on international issues. Starmer may like to project the image of a global statesman, but the brutal truth is that few world leaders, least of all in Washington, have much interest in hearing the views – or lack of them – of Starmer and his Government.
Telegraph
28 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Bumble sacks hundreds of staff as Gen Z dumps dating apps
Young people across the UK may be hoping for their own summer of love. Yet, it turns out, few of them will be using dating apps to find a partner. Matchmaking service Bumble has revealed plans to cut a third of its staff as Gen Z embraces old-school ways of scoring a date. The company behind the UK's third most-popular dating app warned that the industry was at an 'inflection point', weeks after revealing falling sales. Bumble, which is headquartered in Texas and has offices in London, told investors it would axe 240 jobs with the hope of saving $40m (£29.4m) a year. It said the restructure would cost it up to $18m this year. It comes amid growing dating app fatigue. The apps, which include Tinder and Hinge, peaked during the pandemic as people turned to smartphones as a way to escape isolation. Over five years, Bumble's share price has plunged 92pc, while Match Group, the owner of Tinder, has fallen 68pc. Whitney Wolfe Herd, the Bumble chief executive who also co-founded Tinder, told staff on Wednesday: 'The reality is, we need to take decisive action to restructure to build a company that's resilient, intentional and ready for the next decade. 'We've reset our strategy, and are going back to a start-up mentality – rooted in an ownership mindset and team structures designed for faster, more meaningful execution.' 'Novelty wearing off' Bumble's announcement follows a warning from market leader Tinder, which said that Gen Z were seeking a 'more authentic way to find connections'. Last November, Ofcom revealed that use of most popular dating apps in the UK had fallen last year, with Bumble losing 368,000 users, a dip of 2.3pc. The watchdog said: 'Some analysts speculate that for younger people, particularly Gen Z, the novelty of dating apps is wearing off.' Research from Ipsos found that 63pc of men and 66pc of women between the ages of 16 to 24 prefer meeting potential partners in real life rather than through an app. Just 10pc of those men and 7pc of those women prefer dating apps. Use of dating apps is skewed away from women, who account for just 35pc of users, according to Ofcom. Some women avoid the apps amid concerns over safety and repeated unwanted contact from men. Meanwhile, apps are struggling to keep users engaged, with researchers suggesting that young people are becoming more traditional by choosing potential dates through sports clubs and mutual friends. However, there has also been a rise in dating with people met through online gaming. Hobby apps such as Strava, which has social networking features for runners, are also being used to find partners. Research from Virgin Media found that 70pc of Britons dislike dating apps, and that 51pc would prefer to meet a partner through multiplayer computer games. Luke Brunning, a specialist in the philosophy of romantic life at the University Leeds, told The Guardian: 'There is a growing romanticisation of in-person meeting and interaction. Very few [young people] are turning to the apps as an exclusive means of setting up an in-person meeting. It's much more fluid now.'
Daily Mail
35 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Prenup gymnastics that protect Jeff Bezos' billions from Lauren Sanchez after 'historic' payout to first wife
The world's second-richest man, Jeff Bezos, is set to get married to his glamorous girlfriend, Lauren Sanchez in just days - and many have been left wondering if they have a prenup in place. The multi-billionaire Amazon founder, 61, and Sanchez, 55, are already in Venice, Italy ahead of their blockbuster wedding on Saturday. It remains unclear if Bezos and Sanchez have a prenup. He did not have one with his previous wife, philanthropist Mackenzie Scott. The couple, who were married for 25 years, got divorced in 2019. They didn't have a prenuptial agreement to dictate their division of assets, leaving Scott with a monstrous payout. Scott, 55, received 25 percent of their shared stake in Amazon - roughly $35 billion - and became one of the wealthiest women in the world. Bezos kept 75 percent of their stock and her voting control in the company. Despite not knowing if the soon-to-be newly-weds have a prenup, several divorce attorneys said it would be the right move for Bezos, who is worth more than $200 billion, to have one. 'You don't want them to have access to anything that would significantly change their wealth,' Robert Cohen, a New York Attorney who's handled dozens of rich clients, told The Wall Street Journal. The agreements have grown more common for the wealthy, especially for those who have net worths that are nine figures or higher. Prenups are there to dictate how assets will be distributed for a divorced couple, and for the elites, it means figuring out who gets to say things on social media about the legal split, who has access to private jets and sports cars and who cares for their expensive animals, among other lavish possessions. The wealthy, including Bezos, often own several properties across the country and even the world - all of which need to be protected under a prenup, experts told the outlet. And because some homes are located in multiple states and countries, legal exposure is available in a number of places because a divorce can be filed anywhere, per the outlet. The best of the best agreements are recommended for the rich as they often come with choice-of-law clauses, which determine which jurisdiction rules apply no matter where a divorce takes place. Cohen, who has not worked with Bezos or Sanchez, said his team makes sure prenups are properly vetted by legal counsel to avoid any issues. 'We have the agreements vetted by lawyers in those jurisdictions to make sure there's not going to be a problem,' he told WSJ. 'I recently worked on a case where we had to consult lawyers in eight different jurisdictions—all over the world.' The prenups can get so specific that some even detail that a spouse has to maintain a certain weight, while others set financial penalties if a spouse is unfaithful. In fact, one attorney told the outlet they had a client seeking a $1 million payout for each affair. Randall Kessler, another divorce lawyer, said many of the cheating stipulations in prenups are included in agreements with NBA players because they 'are known to have affairs.' Nancy Chemtob, a divorce attorney based in the Big Apple, said every single prenup is a 'power play.' 'Every prenuptial agreement is a power play. It's exciting for them to have this control,' Chemtob, who has not worked with Bezos or Sanchez, added. And, according to Kessler, an Atlanta-based divorce lawyer who has no ties to the famous couple, leverage in the agreements almost always goes toward the partner who cares less about the marriage. 'If you're willing to walk away, you hold all the cards,' he noted. Although prenups are set up to make sure each spouse gets their share of assets in the case of a divorce, Cohen said he often notices a fair trend in the process. 'I find that they're often willing to provide enough in the prenup so it won't be a big negotiation,' he said. Prenups can also include what's known as 'sunset clauses,' meaning the agreement can expire after 10 or 20 years. Elite clients have preferred stepped agreements, where a spouse might get $5 million if there is a divorce after five years of marriage and $20 million after 10, attorneys told the publication. Bezos and Sanchez were spotted arriving in Venice ahead of their wedding on Wednesday. They were seen stepping off a boat as they arrived at the luxury Aman Hotel. After being dropped off by water taxi to the hotel's private jetty, the couple were also joined by around 50 other of their closest guests and friends. The couple began their wedding celebrations with a drinks reception with a playlist of romantic music, blasting More Than A Woman by the Bee Gees. They then continued to play tunes like Nina Simone's I'm Feeling Good, Lovely Day by Bill Withers and Brown Eyed Girl by Van Morrison. Jeff and Lauren mixed the hits with a selection of traditional Italian music as they prepared for their big day. Around 90 private jets are set to land in local airports this week, bringing A-listers from show business, politics and finance to the widely-dubbed 'wedding of the century'. The celebrations are expected to kick off on Thursday and end on Saturday. But the historic venue that Bezos and Sanchez chose for part of their $20 million bash is covered in scaffolding, Daily Mail can reveal. Bezos got engaged to Sanchez in 2023, four years after the collapse of his marriage to Scott.
