The strange thing is not that Spain has opposed 5% of GDP for defense. The strange thing is that it was the only country

At the gates of the Great summit From The Hague, NATO has seen how their debate on military spending had a Unexpected protagonist: Spain. Pedro Sánchez’s refusal to expand that chapter until reaching 5% of GDP has resulted in a strip and loosen between Madrid and the alliance that has resulted in a covenant in extremis which will give greater flexibility to Spain. The key will be that it meets the objectives agreed by the rest of the members, not whether or not you need 5% to achieve it.

The position of Spain is interesting because it opens a background debate: should defense capacities be set based on a random percentage or based on the real needs of each country? Are general spending thresholds?

A percentage: 5%. Beyond the capacities, objectives, pacts or the role of each country, over the last months the debate within NATO has revolved around a figure: 5%, the percentage of GDP that, According to the allianceeach member nation must allocate to the investment in defense. To be more precise, the idea of ​​NATO is that 3.5% is dedicated to basic expenditure, and the remaining 1.5% to “related investments”, which allows infrastructure or expense in industries.

The figure is not accidental. Is exactly the commitment that He claimed Donald Trump, who in December, before even settling in the White House, already He complained openly of the low level of investment of the rest of NATO members and accused the alliance of “taking advantage” of the United States.

A protagonist: Spain. With that backdrop and after months, emphasizing the idea that the allies had to increase their expense in defense, to early month NATO made it clear what its new requirement would be for the allies: to raise the 5% defense expense of GDP in 2035. The agreement was accompanied in addition to an investment plan and a list of new objectives that must be validated at the summit that will be held this week in The Hague. Before that date arrived, however, a voice that was not willing to comply with the 5%goal arose: Spain.

“For Spain to commit to a 5% goal would not only be unreasonable, but also counterproductive,” said Pedro Sánchez in A letter Sent to NATO general secretary, Mark Rutte. In his letter he remembered that raising the investment in 5% defense of GDP would be “incompatible with our welfare state and vision of the world.” With its position, the Moncloa became A loose verse Within the alliance, which even annoying To Washington.

The Giro: A letter. The disagreement between the NATO dome and Madrid did not last too long. Yesterday Sánchez revealed that both parties have reached an agreement that basically gives Spain wide to decide what percentage of its GDP dedicates to meet the objectives set by NATO. That is, the country undertakes to reach the new Capacity objectives military of the alliance, but without having to dedicate 5% of their GDP. The key is to get there, not how it gets.

Sanchez even shared in X Mark Rutte’s letter confirming that NATO will be flexible in that last aspect. In it, the general secretary of the Alliance is clear: “I assume that Spain is sure that the new capacity objectives can be met with a spending trajectory of less than 5% of GDP,” Explain: “I confirm that the agreement reached at the next NATO summit will grant Spain the flexibility to determine its own sovereign trajectory to achieve the objective.” The agency, of course, will review its advances in 2029.

New percentage: 2.1%. The million dollar question arrived at this point is … How much does Spain plan to invest? In 2014, NATO It was marked and the goal that the defense spending reached 2% of GDP, but many of its members were maintained last year far from that threshold that is considered today “insufficient”. Among the lags are Portugal, Italy or Canada, countries that, in some cases, have made a effort To get to the Hague Summit fulfilling 2%.

In the list also appears Spain, whose investment in defense was around last year, according to The data from NATO, 1.3% of GDP. The Government It has moved token Already for the investment to reach this year in 2%, but they do not seem willing to go much further. In yesterday’s statement in which he announced the agreement with NATO, Sánchez insists that the country is in a position to comply with the rest of the allies without moving too much from the 2%threshold.

“Spain will need 2.1% of its GDP to acquire and keep all personnel, all equipment, all infrastructure requested by the Alliance to deal with our abilities to those threats,” Sánchez wields. And emphasize: “2.1%, no more, or less.” “Going from 2 to 5% from here to 2035 would demand to spend about 350,000 million euros, which could only be achieved based on raising taxes at 3,000 euros per year, eliminating benefits, reducing pensions by 40% or cutting in education.”

The substantive debate: capacity or percentage? The case of Spain is interesting both for what it represents within NATO and for the debate that opens: does it make sense to link the objectives of GDP expenditure percentages? What is that general threshold for? Is it only political, a mesurable consensus point, or is it really related to the capabilities of the different allies? Sanchez has gone to the background of that discussion and throws doubts about the usefulness of setting an expenditure objective such as 5%, shared by the 32 NATO members.

“They think that, for example, in some countries the average salary of a soldier is three times greater than in others who are also NATO members, or that producing or acquiring these defense capacities in certain countries costs half than in others,” reason The socialist. It is not the only one in which it points in that direction.

A WARNING: “Insufficient”. In A recent article Published by Andrew Horton and Putri Handrianti and published by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) it is affecting that same idea, applied to the case of Australia. Their authors recognize that quantifying defense expenditure as a percentage of GDP can be practical, didactic, attractive and even serve the government to justify an increase in spending, but also question its usefulness.

“Based on this percentage is deeply insufficient. It fundamentally ignores the complexities of modern defense and runs the risk of embezzlementing valuable resources. In a world in which technological superiority and strategic agility prevail more and more over mass, a percentage point, although politically powerful, does not tell us virtually nothing about our real ability to dissuade aggression or defend our interests.”

One question: politics or defense? Professor Aurelia Valiño Castro left another interesting reflection in An essay Published on the ICEI website: “2% of GDP in defense is more a political commitment than a security guarantee (…). However, its effectiveness depends on efficient investment. For Spain the challenge is not only to increase the budget, but to redesign its spending model to better respond to current threats with European security.” “The crucial is not how much you spend, but how it is invested,” he remarks.

The expert also warns the need to set the terms of comparisons well to avoid errors. “GDP varies according to its calculation in each country”, remember. “Since 2014 the EU includes illegal activities such as drug trafficking or prostitution, representing between 0.2% and 2% of GDP, while the US excludes them. This difference distorts comparisons, since the denominator artificially reduces the percentage of defense expenditure. “

Images | Us Army Europe (Flickr) and NATO

In Xataka | If the question is whether Spain can deny its bases to give Israel to the US, the answer is not so simple