Does NATO Have A Money Problem?

William D. Hartung Director, Defense One: NATO Already Vastly Outspends Russia. Its Problems Are Not About Money.

The alliance’s security issues can’t be fixed by a traditional military buildup.

President Trump’s dismissal of Russian interference in the 2016 election – choosing to believe Vladimir Putin over U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies – has rightly sparked outrage and astonishment. But we shouldn’t let Trump’s disgraceful performance in Russia overshadow the other key issues raised by his recent trip.

In particular, Trump’s tantrum over the need for NATO allies to spend more on defense deserves greater scrutiny. Whether the goal is 2 percent of GDP – the alliance’s long-stated goal – or 4 percent, a fantastic figure Trump floated as well – the real question is whether NATO or the United States need to spend more on traditionally military assets to ensure their security. Contrary to Trump’s assertions, the answer is no.

Read more ....

WNU Editor: The only part of the above commentary that I agree with is his remarks on how NATO spends its money. When Germany spends over $40 billion on defense and can only field a few working fighter aircraft .... you know you have a problem. The author's focus on cyber attacks and Russian propaganda are also nothing new, and if that was the only threat, our defense budgets would be a fraction of what they are. As to the authors concerns about "combating the rise of right-wing, and in some cases neo-fascist parties; finding an equitable solution to its refugee crisis; and reforming its political and economic system to give hope to those left behind by European integration" .... these are political issues where the author has adopted the progressive view. But NATO was not established for this. NATO is a political-military alliance that was established to face foreign threats like the former Soviet Union. NATO was not established to counter the internal threats that this author fears.