STOCKHOLM (Reuters) – NATO members are discussing setting a spending target for civil defence and support for Ukraine on top of core military budget goals, Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said on Monday.
Many NATO members have increased military spending since Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine but they are under pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump to go further and spend 5% of GDP on defence – above their current target of 2%.
Kristersson told reporters in Stockholm that a summit of NATO leaders in The Hague in June may agree a defence spending target above 3% of GDP, together with a second target for other spending more broadly related to security and defence.
“There is an ongoing discussion, which we haven’t seen the end of yet, on whether NATO, in parallel with its target figure for military defence should have a target figure for civil defence, preparedness, support for Ukraine and such things,” he said.
The defence spending target could be “set at 3.5% with an addition of 1.5% for those things that are related to civil defence, Ukraine support and those other things that are outside those areas of immediate military defence,” he said.
According to NATO estimates, 23 of the alliance’s 32 members met or exceeded the 2% target last year. But some of Europe’s big economies, including Italy and Spain, have spent only around 1.5% and 1.3% respectively.
Sweden became NATO’s 32nd member in March last year in a U-turn in foreign policy prompted by worries over Russia.
“I’m very determined to see that we in Sweden live up to the commitments that NATO decides upon,” Kristersson said.
A European diplomat said the discussion on spending targets for the Hague summit was just starting, but there seemed to be an understanding that new military capability targets set by NATO would mean spending around 3.5% of GDP.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, the diplomat said meeting the Trump figure of 5% would require additional elements, including “enhancing resilience and military mobility”.
(Reporting by Simon Johnson; Additional reporting by Sabine Siebold; editing by Barbara Lewis)
Comments