NATO members set 5% defense spending target

What does it mean when every NATO member signs the same promise but defines it differently? At the alliance's summit in Ankara, all thirty-two allies pledged to spend 5% of GDP on defence by 2035 (NATO, Euronews). The declaration was unanimous. The definition of what counts toward that target was not.

Why the Number Exists

The target comes from a warning, not a wish. Before the summit, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte explained the problem plainly: the United States now plans for conflicts beyond Europe, and has scaled back its contributions to NATO's Force Model (the alliance's planning tool for matching forces to threats). European governments must now fund capabilities they long assumed Washington would provide.

The 5% target turns that gap into a bill. The formula, set at The Hague summit in 2025, splits into 3.5% for core military spending and 1.5% for broader defence and security. Ankara added a demand for national plans NATO can inspect, with a review in 2029. What no one defined is what happens when a government misses the mark.

Three Countries, Three Definitions

Lithuania shows what urgency looks like. President Gitanas Nausėda arrived already spending 5.38% of GDP on defence and demanding a firm US commitment to Article 5 (the treaty clause that an attack on one ally is an attack on all). His government secured one concrete result: reclassifying Baltic air policing into an air-defence mission. That matters because air policing watches and intercepts. Air defence prepares to defeat an attack.

Spain sits at the opposite end. Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez publicly rejected the 5% target, arguing NATO should judge capabilities, not percentages. His government accused Rutte of trying to appease Trump and defended Spain's operational contributions as sufficient. That public dissent hands every fiscally constrained ally a template for reinterpretation: sign the declaration, contest the definition later.

Germany falls between. Chancellor Friedrich Merz pledged to reach 3.5% core defence spending by 2029. Berlin reported record spending of €124.7 billion, or 2.69% of GDP, a sharp increase that still falls well below even the core target. German media read the summit as both genuine reassurance and an exercise in managing Trump. Bundeswehr capability gaps and personnel shortages keep the distance between budget lines and deployable forces wide.

A Promise Without Penalties

France raises the question the spending debate avoids. Le Monde reported European armies growing stronger but in scattered, uncoordinated ways. Le Figaro put it more bluntly: Europe wants predictability from Washington, which Washington will not offer. Spending more inside NATO does not automatically reduce dependence on the US.

Article 5 itself is less automatic than it sounds: the Washington Treaty says each ally will take "such action as it deems necessary," leaving the form and scale of any response to national decisions. Ankara created no enforcement mechanism for the 5% target and no penalties for missed plans. Rutte called it a "delivery summit". By 2029, NATO will know whether governments bought capability or bought time.