NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has called for NATO member states to spend 5% of their GDP annually on defense starting in 2035: 3.5% on military investment and 1.5% on all types of infrastructure that can be used for defense. The idea is President Trump's, who wants to reduce the US contribution to the Atlantic budget, which it currently supports. by about 58%Trump is saying that if Europeans want to defend themselves, they should pay for it. And that Spain contributes little and should contribute more.
The Spanish defense budget is around €20 billion, 1.3% of GDP. If it were to increase to 5%, it would mean spending around €75 billion in 2035. From any point of view, it is impossible and unnecessary. To put this into perspective, and using data from NATO itself—in euros, €800 billion, less than 4% of GDP; China, around €290 billion, close to 2% of GDP; and €650 billion. EU aid to Ukraine has been €35 billion in 2024. But why should it be worth spending such a huge amount of resources on weapons and armies?
The EU spends inadequately on defense. Programs are state-run, and European spending doesn't even reach 18%. Development efforts are duplicated, and production is carried out in short series. Interoperability and acquisition costs suffer. The EU has too many models of tanks and combat aircraft, something the US, with a budget almost three times larger, doesn't have.
President Trump's demand is both coarse and self-serving. He tells us: "Spend more, and since you won't have anywhere else to buy, buy from the US." This statement, without a simultaneous call to reorganize the European defense industry to share standards and systems, is like asking for more water to be poured into a leaking container. NATO commitments can be met without necessarily committing to a spending figure. It's surprising that a politician like NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte doesn't explain that increased spending must be accompanied by an industrial and administrative restructuring of defense in the EU. Is President Trump scary? When he says something absurd, doesn't anyone dare to respond?
In the debate over the budget increase, President Sánchez's position is intelligent. Spain's request has met with opposition, leading to a sensible discussion within the Alliance and the EU. Once the initial confrontation with President Trump occurs, more member states will join in.
As for the amount, it must be progressive to allow industries to respond to demand. But it cannot be understood that a budget like the one proposed, 5% of GDP, will be necessary in the future. NATO is a defense alliance, not an imperial presence in the world, as is the case with the US military deployment, or as was the USSR's until 1989. A reorganization of the European defense industry is necessary, sharing responsibilities and adopting common standards.
There are two problems in the EU defense industry. a) Of the €75 billion spent on equipment from June 2022 to June 2023, 63% was purchased from the US: we import too much. b) In R&D, the EU invests €11 billion, while the US, with a budget three times larger, invests €140 billion. In other words, we have a small defense industry, but above all, we invest in R&D only around 20% of what we should be investing. And this is precisely where the defense industry's economic interest lies in the civilian application of technology developed in the military sector.
Spain's commitments to the EU and NATO don't allow us to evade the decisions made in these forums. We must invest more in defense than we have in recent years... but do so intelligently.
The defense industry is cutting-edge technology. If we must invest, let's do it in technological areas with dual applications. It goes without saying what we all know: aviation, antibiotics, space, the internet, lasers, electromagnetic communications... these are inventions that are due, entirely or in large part, to the defense industry.
This industry has three levels: a) Systems, ships, vehicles, aircraft. b) Subsystems, radars, processors, propulsion, communications, information processing, and AI. c) Components, hardware and software, chips, etc. communality At the lower levels, it's growing because a chip is the same for a ship as it is for an airplane. That's why the strength of Catalonia's digital industry offers an opportunity to enter this sector, and to do so in the most profitable area—because it's more transversal—and has the most points in common with the civil sector: the aforementioned third level. The European Commission's investment in Móra la Nova A digital factory and AI, based on space, water, and energy availability, would help achieve this. Between now and 2030, if the Spanish defense budget reaches 2% of GDP, an additional €26 billion could be allocated to technological development.
Does Spain have a sufficiently developed industry to take advantage of this public funding in the next ten years? The answer is that, in the aviation sector, Airbus is an international company with Spanish participation that can do so thanks to its current industrial and technical capacity. In the maritime sector, Navantia is a company in recession, losing €200 million annually. On the land front, companies are small and low-tech. A plan is needed to strengthen the sector's industry and prevent this expenditure from translating into increased imports. Due to its economic importance, this is a serious issue that goes completely unnoticed by the public, but which the central government must address and address.
