Secretary of State Antony Blinken is right to visit NATO headquarters in Belgium. NATO is an extraordinarily successful alliance of exceptional value to the country. But Blinken is wrong to give Belgium a free pass on defense spending.
The State Department briefing note on Blinken’s trip includes the assertion that “Belgium is a close NATO Ally and a strong partner in security and defense, making valuable contributions to the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS and NATO’s Resolute Support Mission in Afghanistan.”
Only the last part of that statement is true, and even then, only marginally so. Belgium has 70 service personnel deployed in Afghanistan, but they are set to return home this year. Moreover, Belgium’s under-investment in NATO security is obvious.
As NATO’s most recent figures for 2020 defense spending attest, under-investment is a polite way of putting it. Out of the alliance’s 30 member states, Belgium was second-to-last in its 2020 defense outlays, spending just 1.07% of its GDP on defense. This is truly inexcusable, coming six years after the 2014 NATO summit, at which all members agreed to move toward a 2%-of-GDP defense spending target. However, it gets worse. Belgium is also third-last when it comes to spending on equipment as a percentage share of its total defense budget. Where the NATO target is to spend 20% on equipment, Belgium spent just 10.4% in 2020.
Former President Donald Trump failed to address this issue with Belgium. President Biden and his secretary of state must not make the same mistake. Because it’s not ultimately about math, it’s about a mathematical measure of defensive commitment.
To support NATO’s deterrent value, allies must bear burdens fairly. That simply isn’t happening at present. NATO figures show that while the U.S. accounted for 53% of NATO’s total GDP 2020, it provided for 73% of NATO’s total defense spending. Unless NATO members recognize their shortchanging, American isolationist voices will only rise in chorus and credibility. Blinken thus must deliver some tough rhetoric in public and private rhetoric in Brussels. If not, the Biden administration will encourage the Europeans to pare back even the limited increases in defense spending they introduced during the Trump administration.
The praise of Belgium isn’t the only concern. The State Department note also unduly salutes the European Union.
Ironically now headed by two of the leaders most responsible for Europe’s defense problems, the EU is delivering less and less for Western interests and values. This is particularly true of Germany, which even allows Russian chemical weapons facilities to operate on its soil (I’m not joking). It’s a reflection of the EU’s unwillingness to confront external aggression against the Western democratic order. Other recent standout examples include the EU’s deference to Russian aggression and tolerance of Russian energy blackmail, its appeasement of China’s imperialism and genocide in return for Beijing’s investment, and its impotent diplomacy in Georgia.
Put simply, if the Biden administration is serious about strengthening NATO, it must take action to that end. Deterring and, if necessary, defeating Russian forces requires more than rhetoric. European freeloading has gone on far too long.
