One of the most prominent issues on the agenda of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in 2025 has been the new goal of member states to increase their defense spending to 5% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This target has been suggested not only for military expenditures but also expanded to include infrastructure and investments in the defense industry. However, Spain has strongly opposed this plan, arguing that it would harm both domestic economic balances and the European Union’s social and environmental priorities. This stance reflects not only a budgetary dispute but also a divergence of strategic priorities within NATO’s shared security vision.
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez rejected the proposed 5% defense spending goal, describing it as “irrational and counterproductive.”[1] In a letter to NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, he stated that an increase in spending of this magnitude would undermine both social welfare and Spain’s green transition targets. He also demanded that, should such a target be imposed, Spain be granted an exemption or that the goal be implemented on a voluntary basis. Sánchez stated, “It is not possible for Spain to accept such a goal, because this level of defense spending poses a threat to societal well-being.”[2] Defense Minister Margarita Robles also stressed the unrealistic nature of the target, saying, “The 5% goal is not realistic. At a time when people expect healthcare, education, and social services, we cannot allocate such a large budget exclusively to defense.”[3]
According to 2024 data, Spain’s defense spending accounted for only 1.28% of GDP, one of the lowest ratios among NATO members.[4] In contrast, the United States leads with 3.38%, while east-line states such as Poland exceed 4%. This imbalance indicates the unequal distribution of the defense burden within the alliance. Within this context, NATO’s move from its traditional 2% benchmark to a more ambitious and multidimensional 5% target is being tested against the realities of economic feasibility with the rhetoric of solidarity.
Spain’s objection is not limited to the percentage but also concerns the scope of the expenditures. The new target has been broadened to cover not only operational military costs but also digital defense technologies, cyber security, military infrastructure, logistics systems, and the defense industry supply chain. The Sánchez government has warned that this expansion would create a shift in national budgets away from social policy priorities. This development has brought to a clash between NATO’s military objectives and the EU’s developmental and green agendas.
Domestic political dynamics in Spain have also played a significant role in shaping this position. The government, led by the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE), is under pressure from its left-wing coalition partners Sumar and Podemos, who advocate investment in social areas such as education, healthcare, and green infrastructure instead of increased defense spending. Indeed, the increase in Spain’s 2024 defense budget was met with public criticism. Sánchez’s firm rejection of the proposed goal has also been interpreted as an effort to protect domestic political legitimacy.
Spain’s stance has triggered varying reactions among NATO members. Countries like Poland, the Baltic states, and Romania, which are geographically closer to Russia, have supported the proposed goal, while others such as Belgium, Italy, and Canada have taken a more cautious approach. Notably, Italy has requested that the target year for meeting the 5% goal be pushed from 2032 to 2035.[5] These divergences have revived discussions within NATO about a possible model of “graduated adaptation” or a “multi-speed alliance.”
Spain’s proposed flexible model aims not only to alleviate economic pressures but also to promote a balanced and sustainable understanding of security within the alliance. NATO’s historical adherence to a unified security paradigm is being questioned in today’s multipolar international environment, both in terms of economic diversity and political orientation. In this context, Spain has positioned itself not merely as a “dissenting party” but as a proponent of an alternative security architecture.
The influence of the United States on NATO also forms part of the backdrop to these debates. Former President Donald Trump’s criticism that the U.S. was “financing Europe’s security” has led to increased pressure on NATO to take on more of the burden. It is understood that the new 5% goal was especially promoted by the United States.[6] However, many European countries have begun to develop different priorities from US aimed at achieving greater independence and autonomous decision-making in the field of defense. This divergence could lead to long-term strategic fragmentation in NATO-EU relations.
In conclusion, Spain’s rejection of the 5% defense spending target has created not only a technical but also a strategic rupture within NATO. This stance is significant as it champions a security approach that prioritizes economic sustainability. Throughout this process, Spain has articulated a position that addresses not only its own fiscal constraints but also contributes to shaping Europe’s future defense architecture. Whether NATO will move toward a structure that accommodates such national differences or continue to push for uniform strategic compliance remains a critical test for the alliance going forward.
[1] Suman Naishadham & Lorne Cook, “Spain rejects NATO’s anticipated 5% defense spending proposal as ‘unreasonable’”, AP News, https://apnews.com/article/spain-nato-spending-increase-f9d105eb41d708acc78356599032b95a, (Accessed: 20.06.2025).
[2] Inti Landauro, Aislinn Laing & David Latona, “Spain risks derailing NATO summit by resisting 5% defence spending goal”, Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/spain-wants-opt-out-natos-5-defence-spending-target-2025-06-19/, (Accessed: 20.06.2025).
[3] Ibid.
[4] Spain rejects NATO’s 5% defence spending hike as counterproductive. Al Jazeera, https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2025/6/19/spain-rejects-natos-5-defence-spending-hike-as-counterproductive, (Accessed: 20.06.2025).
[5] Henry Foy, “Spain risks derailing NATO summit by resisting 5% defence spending goal”, Financial Times, https://www.ft.com/content/4d7ad269-57f2-401d-931c-0841ec18b07e, (Accessed: 20.06.2025).
[6] Suman Naishadham, “Why meeting Trump’s military spending target could be tough for NATO’s lowest spender”, AP News, https://apnews.com/article/spain-nato-us-defense-spending-trump-ed07b2dd28b28cfc20558a10e4f2a58e,(Accessed: 20.06.2025).
