It finally happened. At the latest NATO summit in the Netherlands, leaders signed off on an ambitious new target—5% of GDP on defense spending by 2035, more than double the previous 2% goal set in 2014.
Donald Trump, of course, called it a “monumental win for the United States.” And in a sense, it is. For years, Trump has publicly berated NATO allies for depending too much on American military strength. This agreement feels like his crowning moment: Europe paying more, America applauding louder.
But behind the applause and flags, the picture isn’t quite so unified.
Spain immediately distanced itself from the 5% commitment. Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez declared the new target “unrealistic,” calling 2% a “sufficient” and “realistic” figure. His rebuke didn’t go unnoticed. Trump singled out Spain by name, accusing it of wanting a “free ride” and threatening to make them “pay twice as much” in trade negotiations.
Let’s be clear: the 5% target is not legally binding. Like its 2% predecessor, it’s a symbolic benchmark—one that’s politically powerful, but practically elusive.
Even now, according to NATO estimates, only 22 of 32 countries hit the 2% target in 2024. Countries like Canada, Portugal, and Italy lag behind, and Spain ranks dead last, spending just 1.2% of GDP.
Meanwhile, Poland leads the pack, exceeding 4%, with Estonia, Latvia, and the U.S. also among top contributors. As for Germany, it only recently crossed the 2% line after years of hesitancy.
The summit’s outcome reveals a stark truth: Trump still dominates the defense conversation in Europe. Even when not in office, his pressure tactics drive policy. Leaders across Europe understand this—many fear what a second Trump term could mean for NATO’s survival.
But there’s another problem. Defense spending alone doesn’t guarantee security. As we’ve seen in Ukraine, equipment and budget lines are one thing; political will and coordination are another. Throwing more money into budgets doesn’t fix fractured strategies or underdeveloped defense industries.
If anything, Europe needs smarter spending—not just bigger numbers. That means investment in cybersecurity, joint procurement, and deterring threats that don’t always wear uniforms or fly fighter jets.
So yes, Trump got his 5% headline. But Europe’s defense future won’t be measured in percentages alone. It will depend on whether NATO countries can spend wisely, plan collectively, and resist turning defense into just another political game.