NATO boosts defence budget, but US carries largest burden
On June 5, North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Secretary General Mark Rutte announced an ambitious new defence spending target for all members, including the United States. The proposed target sets total defence investments at five per cent of GDP, comprising 3.5 per cent for core defence capabilities and 1.5 per cent for defence- and security-related investments such as infrastructure and industry.This announcement aligns with US President Donald Trump's longstanding call for NATO allies to increase their defence spending to five per cent, aiming to close existing capability gaps, strengthen deterrence, and prepare for emerging global threats.advertisementDEFENCE EXPENDITUREAccording to the NATO Defence Expenditure report (2014-2024), defence spending among NATO member countries has increased significantly over the past decade. The United States remains the largest spender, with an estimated defence expenditure of $755 billion in 2024 — 3.4 per cent of its GDP — marking a 14.3 per cent increase since 2014.
Notably, Poland has shown the highest growth rate of 213.7 per cent, increasing its defence budget from $8.6 billion in 2014 to an estimated $26.8 billion in 2024, now accounting for 4.12 per cent of its GDP. Other countries like Turkey and the Netherlands have also more than doubled their defence spending, with growth rates of 128.7 and 113.9 per cent, respectively.HOW MANY MEET 2% SPENDING?Till now, NATO members have been required to spend at least two per cent of their GDP on defence to meet the alliance's guidelines. But in reality, not all of them spent that much. The number of NATO allies meeting the two per cent target, however, has steadily increased alongside the growth in total member countries.advertisementIn 2014, only three out of 28 members (11 per cent) met the target. By 2020, 30 per cent of allies were spending at least two per cent of their GDP on defence. This number rose sharply to 23 out of 32 members (72 per cent) by 2024. During this period, the alliance expanded with Montenegro joining in 2017, North Macedonia in 2020, Finland in 2023, and Sweden in 2024, contributing to the increase in total members.WHO SPENDS MORE?In January this year, the Trump administration urged NATO allies to significantly increase their spending, emphasising that European nations should take primary responsibility for their defence.NATO's total defence expenditure has steadily increased over the past decade, rising from $910 billion in 2014 to an estimated $1,185 billion in 2024, based on 2015 prices and exchange rates. While the United States remains the largest contributor, accounting for around 73 per cent of NATO's total defence spending in 2014, its share is gradually decreasing. By 2024, the US is projected to contribute about 64 per cent of the total defence expenditure, amounting to $755 billion.At the same time, defence spending by European allies and Canada increased from $250 billion to an estimated $430 billion, although this amount remains lower than US spending. Despite the increase in defence spending, some NATO countries still fall short of the two per cent GDP target. The question is whether the recent rise in spending is largely driven by pressure from Trump, as the US is the largest contributor to NATO's defence.Must Watch
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Critical minerals will remain a problem in US-China talks. These industries are at risk.
Critical minerals will likely remain a source of leverage for Beijing in trade talks with the U.S., even if President Donald Trump's Thursday call with Xi Jinping speeds up the flow of rare earths to feed auto, industrial and other supply chains. The issue dates back to early April, when China imposed restrictions on exports of the metals as part of its retaliation against Trump's imposition of tariffs of up to 145% on its exports to the U.S. In mid May, after negotiators met in Geneva, the U.S. said China had agreed to lift the restrictions as the countries agreed to a 90-day pause on levies that were choking off trade between them. The problem is that while China is allowing exports of rare earths, used in magnets that go into automobiles, for example, companies that want to export them need licenses. Companies say they aren't easy to get, though Reuters reported on Friday that Beijing had granted temporary licenses to suppliers of the big three U.S. auto makers. Its report cited people familiar with the matter. A spokesperson from the Chinese embassy said he wasn't aware of the situation specifically related to the licensing, reiterating that the export control measures are in line with international common practices, nondiscriminatory, and not targeted at specific countries. While only a fraction of the members of the American Chamber of Commerce in China—mostly technology and industrial companies—were affected by rare-earth export restrictions, three-quarters of those said their supplies would run out within three months, according to a survey from the trade group. While the survey found that Chinese suppliers to U.S. companies had recently been granted six-month export licenses, they noted continued uncertainty because there is a large backlog of license applications. Gracelin Baskaran, a mining economist and director of the Critical Minerals Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said about 25% of licenses applied for have been given out, but that they aren't being processed fast enough. Part of that is due to the administrative task. China is the source of 100% of the rare-earth processing capability in the world, so it is issuing licenses for exports not just to the U.S., but for many other countries. But it could also be part of the negotiations. 'China has made it very clear it's not satisfied with the 90-day tariff pause and looking for a more durable solution to the tariff conundrum," said Baskaran, noting the deflationary impact of the tariffs on China's economy. 'It's not in their incentive to give out licenses quickly as their economy is in a downward spiral. These licenses are their leverage." The U.S. had been the dominant rare-earth producer until the 1990s, but China steadily took market share, ramping up production to levels that made it unprofitable for others, forcing them out, Baskaran said. A similar phenomenon is currently under way in nickel, she U.S. has been producing rare earths in California and is building out separation and processing capabilities, with companies like MP Materials boosting their refining abilities. 'It's a perfectly solvable problem and one the U.S. is working at warp speed to address," Baskaran said. 'It's not a forever problem." That said, it could continue be a source of pain, leaving the U.S. vulnerable in talks with China. An array of industries reliant on these critical minerals, from autos to electronics, semiconductors, and defense, are likely to suffer. Write to Reshma Kapadia at
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Iran furious over Trump's travel ban on 12 countries: ‘Racist, supremacist mentality'
An Iranian official denounced the "racist mentality" of US policymakers as US President Donald Trump reinstated the travel ban on 12 countries. Director General for the affairs of Iranians broad, Alireza Hashemi-Raja, said on Saturday the move was "a clear sign of the dominance of a supremacist and racist mentality among American policymakers." He lambasted Trump's travel ban, saying that it "indicates the deep hostility of American decision-makers towards the Iranian and Muslim people". Meanwhile, Reuters quoted Iran's foreign ministry as saying in a post on X, "The decision to ban the entry of Iranian nationals - merely due to their religion and nationality - not only indicates the deep hostility of American decision-makers towards the Iranian people and Muslims but also violates... international law." US President Donald Trump signed a new order on Wednesday banning the citizens of 12 countries from entering the United States. The countries affected by the latest travel ban are Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. As per the order, the entry of people from seven other countries will be partially restricted. These include Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela. The ban takes effect on June 9, 2025 (Monday) at 12:01 am EDT (0401 GMT). The ban, which Trump said was necessary to protect against "foreign terrorists", was reminiscent of a similar move he implemented during his first term in office from 2017 to 2021, when he barred travellers from seven Muslim-majority nations. (With inputs from agencies)
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Tighter H-1B rules, tech layoffs push Indians to alternate US visas
As scrutiny around H-1B work visa applications intensifies and tech layoffs continue to rattle the US job market, Indian professionals and their employers are increasingly exploring alternative visa routes to live and work in the US, reported The Economic Times. Among the most sought-after options now are the L-1 and O-1 non-immigrant visas. Simultaneously, there's a significant uptick in interest for the EB-5 immigrant investor visa programme. 'These trends aren't entirely new, but we've seen a sharp rise in the number of people reaching out over the past few months,' Gnanamookan Senthurjothi, a US immigration attorney, told The Economic Times. The shift comes as the US, under the Donald Trump administration, has ramped up its scrutiny of H-1B visa applications since the start of the year. According to recent data from the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), H-1B visa approvals this year dropped by 27 per cent Year-on-Year—marking the lowest since the pandemic-hit FY21. Each year, the US allots 85,000 H-1B visas to foreign professionals, with Indians accounting for nearly 70 per cent of the total. However, a wave of layoffs across major tech firms including Microsoft, Google, and Intel has deepened uncertainty among Indian workers in the US. 'Our clients have become more fearful and anxious, particularly regarding international travel and visa 'stamping' at consular posts abroad,' said Joel Yanovich, attorney at the Murthy Law Firm. 'I don't think a day goes by where I don't have a client or two asking me whether it's safe to travel.' Rise in L-1 and O-1 applications In response to growing apprehensions around the H-1B process, more applicants are turning to L-1 and O-1 visas—both of which do not have annual numerical limits. The L-1 visa facilitates intracompany transfers, while the O-1 visa is designed for individuals with extraordinary ability in fields such as science, arts, or business. 'Part of this [spike in demand] is seasonal, based on people not being selected for the H-1B lottery,' Yanovich said. 'But part of it appears to stem from employers and individuals hoping to avoid the heightened scrutiny they fear the H-1B program may face.' Canada as a staging ground Adding to the shift, companies are also considering temporary assignments outside the US as a strategic move to qualify employees for other visa categories. 'What we are also seeing is that some companies are transferring their employees to countries like Canada or elsewhere outside the US for a short time so that they will qualify for the L-1 visa,' Sukanya Raman, country head – India & GCC practice team at Davies & Associates LLC, was quoted as saying by The Economic Times. This tactic typically applies to professionals in managerial roles who may later transition to the EB-1C visa, which can lead to a green card, she said. There's also rising interest in the EB-2 NIW (National Interest Waiver)—a green card category for individuals with advanced degrees whose work is deemed to benefit the US on a national level. EB-5 investor visa sees surge The EB-5 immigrant investor visa has also seen a notable 50 per cent increase in demand since January 2025, according to Raman. 'These are in current status for Indian nationals, which means that visas are available and applicants can receive their authorisation and travel documents in just 3-6 months,' she noted. 'This allows them to stay in the US legally.'
