NATO’s June summit in The Hague will present a critical opportunity for America’s allies to reaffirm their commitment to collective security. The worsening security environment in both Europe and the Indo-Pacific can only be met by increased burden-sharing from all NATO members.
NATO: An Alliance Ripe for Change
Longstanding imbalances in defense expenditures and strategic responsibilities within the alliance have culminated in a vital need to undertake four reforms.
Reinforce Article 3: Commitment to Self-Defense
Article 3 of the North Atlantic Treaty requires NATO members to “maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack.” There are legitimate concerns that many nations may not be fully capable of defending themselves, let alone aiding the collective capacity to support one another in conflict.
According to a recent analysis by the Heritage Foundation, America’s NATO allies have collectively underfunded their defense commitments by more than $827 billion. Notable shortfalls include Germany ($249 billion), Italy ($150 billion), and Spain ($150 billion). These shortfalls represent a decade of underinvestment in capabilities and maintenance. The end result is less-capable militaries.
During this period, the U.S. averaged defense spending equivalent to 3.42 percent of GDP, while the average NATO member spent 1.59 percent—less than half as much as the U.S. spent and well below NATO’s 2 percent benchmark first articulated in 2006 and reaffirmed by all members at the 2014 Wales Summit.
Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 and its invasion of Ukraine in 2022 exposed the consequences of decades of underinvestment. European nations have struggled to deliver on promised military support to Ukraine, with depleted stockpiles and limited industrial capacity—especially in munitions—undermining their ability to take the lead on military aid to Ukraine.
The 2 percent minimum has become a political bellwether in Washington, and fulfilling these obligations will strengthen transatlantic relations.
Raise NATO Spending Targets to at Least 3 percent
NATO’s current defense-spending target of 2 percent has proven insufficient to deter aggression. There are now growing calls for a 3 percent threshold—not as a new obligation, but as a necessary correction for more than a decade of underinvestment. In fact, most countries that have a deficit in spending will likely take until 2030 to 2035 just to reach the original 2-percent minimum target agreed upon in 2014.
This higher minimum threshold would accelerate rearmament in munitions production, military mobility infrastructure, and training. It would signal strategic resolve.
Reform the 20 Percent Equipment and R&D Requirement
The 2014 Wales Summit also set a target for NATO members to allocate at least 20 percent of their defense budgets “on major equipment, including related Research & Development.” However, many nations only met this metric by spending below the 2 percent minimum target, undercutting the policy’s intent.
For example, Spain has consistently met the 20 percent equipment requirement, but only spent 1 percent of overall GDP on defense. When looking only at the equipment expenditure target, Spain could claim to have overspent the minimum target by $1.3 billion since 2014. However, when considering that the target is to spend 0.4 percent of GDP on equipment—20 percent of 2 percent of GDP—Spain is down $28.4 billion on equipment since 2014.
Therefore, NATO could explore reforming its guideline by setting a floor on equipment spending that uses GDP as a reference. For example, a new standard could be to spend 0.6 percent of GDP for equipment—20 percent of a revised 3 percent GDP minimum. Given Europe’s travails in delivering military equipment to Ukraine on promised timelines, these conversations are both timely and germane. Further, implementing such a policy is prudent for any individual nation, whether or not it is formally codified in a declaration.
Address the Fiscal Realities of the United States
After decades of overspending, the United States is approaching its fiscal limits. Interest payments on U.S. national debt are set to exceed annual defense spending. Washington cannot afford to subsidize allies while bearing an outsized share of global security burdens. As China adopts an increasingly bellicose posture toward Taiwan, deepens ties with Iran, and provides support for Russia’s actions in Ukraine, NATO must grapple with global instability and embrace genuine burden-sharing . The most significant thing European NATO members can do to help America deter China is to provide the bulk of conventional deterrence in Europe so that U.S. forces can shift to the Indo-Pacific.
An F-35A Lighting II takes off for a Red Flag-Nellis 24-2 night mission at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, March 18, 2024. The presence of the F-35s offers the U.S., Allies, and partners a versatile and highly capable system, enhancing collective defense measures while reinforcing the NATO Alliance’s commitment to leveraging top-tier military capabilities for regional security and deterrence. (U.S. Air Force photo by 1st Lt. Jimmy Cummings)
NATO must use the Hague summit to recommit to Article 3; adopt a robust 3-percent-of-GDP defense-spending target; consider setting equipment-spending standards to 0.6 percent of GDP; and recognize the fiscal limitations facing the United States.
Failure to act now, individually and collectively, will increase the likelihood of future conflict. Decisive reform, however, will ensure NATO remains a credible force for peace and deterrence well into the 21st century.
About the Authors:
Miles Pollard is an economic policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis. Kyle Mendelson was a member of Heritage’s Young Leaders Program.
Neil Wolstenholme
April 21, 2025 at 10:54 am
yes NATO members by and large have to increase spending commitments however this article needs to be balanced.
Comparing spending amongst NATO members does not consider the amount the USA spends globally which is not in the context of NATO.
In other words, how much of the 3.42% US global spend is attributable to NATO?
Someone needs to write a clear & coherent article detailing how much each member actually contributes to NATO, not national defense spending figures per country.
The article does not consider that many NATO members are EU members which has contributed 100 billion plus already to UKraine.
Ditto the UK which has made multi billion dollar contributions to Ukraine not sourced from defense budgets.
Jim
April 21, 2025 at 11:32 am
Yes, European countries need a plan for military expenditures which reflects their security needs.
But also Europe needs a new security architecture which reduces the need for a military buildup reminiscent of the Cold War.
It’s not in Europe’s interest to be “boxed in” on the European Peninsula cut-off from the Eurasian Landmass.
Europe needs to come to terms with the failure of the Ukraine policy and move on from it. I recognize the hostility Europe has towards Russia, but it’s not in their interests to forever harbor such ill-feeling that it creates debilitating military tension or cuts them off from economic trade relations with Russia or even farther East with China.
Contrasted with those ‘crying wolf’ about Russia invading Europe there are promising signs that with a peace settlement or Russian victory whichever comes first, a reset could occur for better relations, but first Europe must comes to terms with Ukraine’s failure.
Another aspect of all this discussion is Europe must recharge their economies. Techno-feudalism imposed by hysterical so-called “climate crisis” policies are a death knell for Europe. Being satisfied with an 800 sq. foot pod, own nothing and be happy, no car and live in a 15 minute city, and, even “eat insects” is a recipe for total European failure and possibly fading away under the weight of the Muslim illegal invasion which is slowly whittling any sense Europe is still Europe.
Europe is on the precipice of destroying themselves… and they refuse to acknowledge what is happening to them because it is their very own political leaders betraying their respective peoples… not an outside attacking foreign power.
Heal thy self Europe… you are sick… it’s not about the “sick man of Europe” all of Europe is sick, outside of a handful of dissenting European countries a general decline in European Civilization is happening.
They have nobody, but themselves to blame.
waco
April 21, 2025 at 1:28 pm
NATO is the most dangerously EVIL military outfit or military organization since the demise of the blood-bloody infamous Tripartite Pact.
NATO is a product of the Cold War, but after end of cold war, NATO instead of closing shop, has moved forward and initiated a series of blood-bloody operations similar to the list of big achievements by the great bloodthirsty conqueror genghis.
NATO with huge great relish romped up the oily 1991 gulf war, the bloody 1999 bombing of yugoslavia, the 2001 invasion of afghanistan, 2003 invasion of iraq, the 2011 bombing of libya, the massive 14-year covert operation against syria, the great global sinister alliance with assorted islamist/jihadists groups and, now, today, the truly vicious proxy war against russia.
The signs are right now all pointing to the coming of ww3.
To counter NATO, all countries with a big bullseye painted on their heads, need to deploy big nuke arsenals to space !!!
Cal Lawrence
April 21, 2025 at 1:45 pm
Really, “analysis by the Heritage Foundation”? That’s a complete joke. The Heritage Foundation is as non-credible as it gets.
Cal Lawrence
April 21, 2025 at 1:47 pm
As usual, waco delivers the Russian propaganda lies. The actual bloodthirsty evil conquerors are the Russian military that NATO stands up against.
And just FYI, “Yugoslavia” did not exist in 1999.
Michael
April 21, 2025 at 4:37 pm
Dzhim,
there is really nothing that rashka-paraska has to offer the world. You are stuck in the Golden Horde mentality and we want nothing of it. Ironically, even Mongolia has moved on. But for you, it is too late. Your demographics point in the wrong direction and the life expectancy is lower than for Bhutan (!) You ruined your goodwill, your economy and your industry for basically nothing. Nobody will bail you out like in 1991.
And when the implosion starts, China will retake the temporarily annexed Manchuria. Have fun.
The Voice of Reason
April 22, 2025 at 11:39 am
The inevitable implosion will not be averted.
Europe doesnt spend money on defense because it doesnt fear Russia. Full stop.
Russia as a threat to Europe is an invention of disinformation with over estimated Russian capability for almost two decades before reversing itself 180 degrees in 2022 (suddenly Russia was just as evil but totally incompetent and without capable weapons).
Europe can actually see that Russia is capable of grinding down a country less than 1/3 its size but not much more.
A real scenario where Russia attacks NATO is easily deterred and/or avoided.
Raise the targets all you like, but actually taking food out of European mouths to spend on weapons will grow increasingly difficult. Incumbent after incumbent will fall until eventually the European elite will look at each other and ask “why are we doing this again? Why dont we just pay them for the oil?”
Tim
April 22, 2025 at 12:32 pm
Forget spending percentages and sub-percentages and who’s doing what and how. Just cut the Gordian knot – Europe can defend itself, get us out.
We’ve let the Europeans make fools of us for decades. We do all the heavy lifting, while they sit back and spend on their social programs, safe in the knowledge that Big Daddy America will always be there to protect them. They’ve grown so dependent on us, that they now believe
America military protection is their God-given birthright.
Four of the world’s ten largest economies, and eleven of the world’s twenty largest, are NATO members excluding the US. Two European NATO states, the UK and France, are nuclear powers. Of course they can defend themselves, but they won’t put on their big-boy pants and do it so long as we continue to do all the hard work.
Alexander Scipio
April 22, 2025 at 3:01 pm
If anyone can elucidate any logic in defending a nation, any nation – from within or without, but particularly from without by asking citizens of another nation to pay for it – whose citizens/subjects do not believe in their future enough, even, to populate that future (eg defend… what?!?), I’m all ears…. Not ONE european nation has anywhere close to replacement fertility. Defending them is a fool’s errand.
Swamplaw Yankee
April 23, 2025 at 4:10 am
Can the reader accept the premise above?
What do the peer readers miss?
It is hard to believe that NATO can not re-activate the Yellloou Belliiie Yankee of 1939-1940-1941. A real invasion and real death was ongoing across Europe. The orc muscovite elite kissed and rubbed the NAZI elite the right way. The orc elite wanted to get hold of Western Ukraine to butcher the independent Ukrainians that the orc muscovites missed butchering + sex trading since 1914.
As orc muscovite elites devoured Ukraine from 1914 the above deaths were ignored in the USA. Who in the USA cared about some far away NAZI baloney that only intellectuals knew about.
The reality of WW2 was deflected by exactly what: the Yankee emotional gist.
So, today, the reality of the Balkan War, the Chechan 3 wars, the 2014 sell out of Ukraine by the USA seems deflected by the Yankee emotional gist. Can the average Yankee Doodle even be accurate about the facts on the above? That cultural investigation is a sociological gold field. It is needed!
Today, the above seems geared for a MSM viewpoint geared to the USA dep state. Authors from other states paint different panels on their Potemkin Village MSM depictions.
The USA inner state might want robust thoughts on the above. What about a re-think on Mexico? Why is the USA protecting Mexico for free? Why has the USA spent so much on military so that the Yankee tax payers can protect Mexico? Where is the Unique “treaty” of cost-sharing military needs with Mexico?
Why did Ernest Hemingway, et al, need to go out NAZI sub hunting? Where are all the Hollywood movies depicting the huge Mexican home fleet out hunting NAZI or Nipper subs?
The vicious progeny of Yankee Yeloooou Belliiies still vent on Canada. This is due to the fact that Canuck lads and lasses died and were maimed for years and forced to look their neighbour in the eye + be polite, nice and courteous to out and out Yankee cowards.
The Yankee Yellooou Bellie of WW2 has no such concern about a moral or ethical rebuke from Mexico. The amigo nation, the whole state, lacks a 102 year old General Richard Rohmer figure. The amigo nation does not have a single man who can state that they fought in WW2 while the Yankee was yellow. Yes, Mexican literature is so full of angst + lamentation of this sad reflection of Mexican History. Hollywood is rushing to film the latest best novel in this vein. Not.
Everyone knows that the multiple cartels in Mexico have a GNP greater than many nations inside the EU. What about the USA demanding a cut for defence from these highly organized structure? What nation in South American is not involved with the multiple cartel structure?
Does not a high Yankee soldier, Chuck DeVore state that the Han CCP is funding the cartel structures of Mexico for military upgrading? Is DeVore correct that the Han CCP has cut military treaties with the cartels that involve the attack of the USA from within and without? So, the CCP can utilize all of China to undermine the USA, a NATO and NORAD member? The CCP is funding the shipping of pre-curser drug supply to these Mexican allies so that the cartels can make billions in profit incapacitating countless Yankee children. Is that correct? Hmmm?
Everyone can see that the Canadians are in an election where nobody, 100%, in Canada is even whispering 5 % of GNP for defence. The whole cabal refuses to even talk of 3% GNP for defence as a campaign plank. The whole sellout of Ukraine by the USA in 2014 is ignored. All want to be leaders deflect this reality with a long-term falsehood: the defence % of GNP might reach 2% when Putin lands on Canadian Arctic snow fields. All this deflection by Canadians and the Yankee MSM is so, very silent.
Free health care, free dental care, free medical death for seniors, affordable + free housing for illegal invaders, doubling of the budget of CBC MSM is the vote getting catylistic allure for the very new “multi-cultural” voting block. The Yankee reads this transparent data, yet refuses to debate and act on it beforehand.
America is cheating itself by refusing to confront the Canadian elector on the reality that the CBC refuses to depict to the captive Canadian audience.
America is cheating itself by refusing to confront the Mexican structure with concepts of responsibility. Why is the USA tax payer providing free, no-cost, give away military protection to Mexico? Refuse to allow any Mexican imports into the USA unless the supplier can produce evidence that they fought + paid to have a 5% GNP for defence budget.
As the Yankee refuses to stop the idiotic Whackoff shill parrots, making comedy that they negotiate unilaterally for Ukraine, Iran, etc, etc. the whole USA structure self-forces itself into disrespect. Why the need in the USA for this emotional catharsis? Who can expose this emotional disability of the American and demand immediate self therapy?
That individual Ukrainians point out this disaster in allowing the Whackoff shill, parrot stooges show, shows the peer reader the extent of the damage that the USA has self-inflicted on its former cognition.
The battle started by the Nabokov Lolita orcs for their ancient genetic sex trade needs must be understood in the USA. Ukrainians fought in 1616 to save their children from Nabokov Lolita diseased peasant russians! The Ukrainians alive today have survived 2 thousand years of sex trade peasant russians. They know the open disgrace of Whackoff idiots unable to mouth a pre-demand of $10,000,000 in gold bullion from Putin as compensation and reparation per each kidnapped Ukrainian child.
The question is can the very recent state creation called USA understand that the Potemkin Village TV screens carry agit-prop about very long ethnic battles with NO fake code words used like PEACE! -30-