Just to be super precise "As all of NATO (except Spain) pledge to increase their defense spending to 5%" by the year 2035, so, rather distant perspective. More, for military is 3.5%, 1.5% is on "double-use" spending. For instance Italy wants to invest those money into building the bridge from Sicily to mainland. No doubts an important piece of infrastructure, if NATO is planning war with Tunisia (who knows!).
Even more, to be even more precise, the communication is that "NATO countries agreed", not "all NATO countries agreed", Spain was just openly frank, that they don't care. Others, like Belgium or Hungary, were not really hiding their negative attitude to those ideas, nevertheless they signed, who care what will happen in 10 years perspective in a democratic country, this can be someone else problem...
And, at last, I am old enough to remember NATO Summit in 2014, just after Russia invasion on Crimea and Donbas, where "NATO countries agreed" to spend 2% of GDP for military and except Poland, Greece (fearing Turkey) and to some extent France (spending tones of money of their expensive nuclear weapon arsenal) NOBODY didn't care AT ALL. Instead whole Europe was happily buying cheap Russian oil and gas.
So, I am not really cheering up that much yet. Let's wait and see what will happen in, say, 3 years perspective.
Your analysis is precise. Still I think there are some missing details. First, the real goal of the 5 percent was to satisfy Tacos ego. Success. Second, the division between dual use and military use was needed to make that goal. It is also similar to how the US counts, for instances health care for soldiers and families included in their military expenses, while in other countries with a universal healthcare this isn’t. Third, increasing the «military» spending to 3,5 percent in itself is a massive increase. Spain and other countries misgivings are of course not unique. Nobody really wants this, but what can they do? I think the goal is ambitious and reasonable. Whether or not it can be reached, well let’s be realistic here, probably not. But it will be worked towards. Because circumstances are different in 2025 than 2014.
They can, but that is simply to costly at the moment. If they try to mime to his lyrics and avoid more rupture they can at the same time prepare for the inevitable breach and continue to support Ukraine without too much friction. The breach has happened but Europe plays for time. They cannot do anything else. They may have been naive earlier, but they are not now.
Just to be super precise "As all of NATO (except Spain) pledge to increase their defense spending to 5%" by the year 2035, so, rather distant perspective. More, for military is 3.5%, 1.5% is on "double-use" spending. For instance Italy wants to invest those money into building the bridge from Sicily to mainland. No doubts an important piece of infrastructure, if NATO is planning war with Tunisia (who knows!).
Even more, to be even more precise, the communication is that "NATO countries agreed", not "all NATO countries agreed", Spain was just openly frank, that they don't care. Others, like Belgium or Hungary, were not really hiding their negative attitude to those ideas, nevertheless they signed, who care what will happen in 10 years perspective in a democratic country, this can be someone else problem...
And, at last, I am old enough to remember NATO Summit in 2014, just after Russia invasion on Crimea and Donbas, where "NATO countries agreed" to spend 2% of GDP for military and except Poland, Greece (fearing Turkey) and to some extent France (spending tones of money of their expensive nuclear weapon arsenal) NOBODY didn't care AT ALL. Instead whole Europe was happily buying cheap Russian oil and gas.
So, I am not really cheering up that much yet. Let's wait and see what will happen in, say, 3 years perspective.
Your analysis is precise. Still I think there are some missing details. First, the real goal of the 5 percent was to satisfy Tacos ego. Success. Second, the division between dual use and military use was needed to make that goal. It is also similar to how the US counts, for instances health care for soldiers and families included in their military expenses, while in other countries with a universal healthcare this isn’t. Third, increasing the «military» spending to 3,5 percent in itself is a massive increase. Spain and other countries misgivings are of course not unique. Nobody really wants this, but what can they do? I think the goal is ambitious and reasonable. Whether or not it can be reached, well let’s be realistic here, probably not. But it will be worked towards. Because circumstances are different in 2025 than 2014.
I can suggest what they can do: how about just say no to the malignant force residing in DC. VIVA ESPANA!
They can, but that is simply to costly at the moment. If they try to mime to his lyrics and avoid more rupture they can at the same time prepare for the inevitable breach and continue to support Ukraine without too much friction. The breach has happened but Europe plays for time. They cannot do anything else. They may have been naive earlier, but they are not now.
That map of the maelstrom of units in XX Corps' sector depicts in one image all you and Tom have been talking about for years.
I would say, 'Thanks", but it is just too grim.
Thank you for this.