Trump-led military race drags Spain into the mix
Sanchez maneuvers to avoid increasing military spending and avoid the political cost that this could entail
MadridThe problems faced by the PSOE and Junts are causing them to postpone a debate that will come sooner or later: how and by how much will the defence budget increase? The next public accounts to be presented by the Minister of Finance, María Jesús Montero, either this quarter or after the summer, looking ahead to 2026, will have to reflect an increase in line with the Spanish government's promises to NATO. "Spain is a serious, committed ally and will deliver," said the Minister of Defence, Margarita Robles, this week in Brussels, where she met with her counterparts from the Atlantic Alliance. Donald Trump has already put the figure of 5% of GDP on the table and a NATO summit is planned for June where the 3% target could be set. The EU is already considering relaxing fiscal rules so that states can spend more on defence.
After the last summit in Madrid, in 2022, the Moncloa placed 2029 as the year in which it would reach 2%. The new horizon that NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte now wants to set has forced Pedro Sánchez to change his strategy. From the start, the Spanish president is critical of this escalation and in January warned that he will not fuel a "militaristic drift that leads to a new arms race." This positioning, in part, has been seen with the request that Spain and other countries have made to the European Investment Bank led by former Spanish Vice President Nadia Calviño to get involved in financing military industry projects and also in the maneuvers to try to get other contributions to count that the State does in the field of security. For example, in the area of anti-terrorism, although the executive has not quantified them.
Sánchez now finds himself with the contradiction of having tried to hide the true military expenditure – due to the political and social cost it may have – and now, instead, trying to convince NATO that it spends more than it says. The last time new budgets were approved in the State, at the end of 2022, the Treasury put the figure at 12,317 million euros, which is the amount that comes exclusively from the Ministry of Defense, although in reality it was 12,317 million euros. almost double. Entities such as the Delàs Centre for Peace Studies have long been reporting on the total allocations distributed among other ministries that increase spending and, in fact, the Spanish government itself offers NATO data that is different from what it provides to the public. For example, it includes credits from the Ministry of Industry for military R&D.
The attached graph reflects a difference between what the Atlantic Alliance reports in its reports and what the Delàs Centre concludes, because this entity incorporates the entire budget dedicated to the Civil Guard – a military body with civil functions –, the interests of the public debt corresponding to the field of defence and the unforeseen expenses that come from the cone fund. This chapter has grown notably due to aid to Ukraine: in recent years it was around 1,000 million, but in 2023 it was 2,462 million and in 2024 2,929, according to the calculations of the Delàs Centre. All this means that, according to the criteria used to interpret the data, the percentage of military spending on GDP in Spain is already close to 2% currently, although what NATO recognises is 1.28% in 2024 and leaves Spain at the bottom.
The indicators used by NATO benefit small economies that, proportionally, spend more on defence, and, on the other hand, harm countries such as Germany, Italy, France or Spain that, on the contrary, contribute in "strategic and operational capacity", underlines the principal investigator of the Real Instituto Elcano Félix Arteaga. In conversation with the ARA, he explains that the Spanish government is trying to value this more qualitative contribution, not so much the money that is allocated but what is done. In this sense, Arteaga maintains that Spain more than meets the percentage of investment in military material in relation to total defence expenditure (30.3%) and is ahead of the NATO average (20%).
Is the increase justified?
Given the spending map, some experts are calling for a debate to be grounded on whether this increase, which some see as arbitrary, is justified. "A budget is zero-sum and, if you spend on one thing, you stop spending on another. That must be explained. It is done behind the citizens' backs with the argument that there is a bad enemy," criticises the former chief of the defence staff (Jemad) and leader of Podemos to the ARA. If with the arrival of Trump the truce with Ukraine is closer, is the increase justified? For Arteaga, from the Elcano Institute, yes. Firstly, because a ceasefire does not mean the end of the war, he says. "Secondly, we have a hostile climate of hybrid war, with cyberattacks against countries," he continues, adding: "The need for spending is justified both by the threat and by the perception of threat."
Rodríguez disagrees with this idea, denying the levels of danger that the EU warns of. "A collective hysteria has set in among European leaders that Putin will invade other countries," says Pere Ortega, from the Delàs Centre. Both are highly critical of what the former Chief of Staff describes as the "war business." "Wars must last long enough for companies' investments to be profitable," and then the "reconstruction business" begins, which benefits the real estate industry, he warns. "Nobody guarantees that more weapons will provide greater security," he says, contrary to the thesis that rearmament encourages deterrence of the adversary. Supporters of the arms race point out that, given that the US threatens to stop contributing to European security, the EU states must make an effort.
But is it feasible? The second vice-president of the Spanish government, Yolanda Díaz, warned a few days ago that Spain does not have sufficient productive capacity and that it could only reach the figures that Rutte is asking for by buying weapons from the USA, "which has its own economic and business interests." Because of this symbiosis, Ortega believes that Trump will not go so far as to dissolve NATO, although his enemy is not Putin – Rodríguez points out – but China.
