Find common ground

(Baonghean) - The first meeting between US President Donald Trump and the leaders of NATO allies at the bloc's Summit is highly anticipated. The event on May 25 in Brussels will clarify the US's commitment to Europe, as well as the issue of contributing operating costs - a controversial issue between the two sides.

US President Trump wants NATO to increase its role in the fight against the self-proclaimed Islamic State (IS). Photo: The Hill

Money pressure

Nearly five months since US President Donald Trump took office, leaders of NATO’s European allies have been in a state of shock. They were bewildered by President Trump’s inaugural statements.

Those were the comments on Twitter by the US President that the US would reconsider its commitments if European countries did not increase defense spending and contribute more to the bloc's budget.

The White House boss also feels that NATO should devote more energy to the fight against terrorism and that US allies have benefited from Washington's "security umbrella" but have not shared their financial responsibilities accordingly.

But they breathed a sigh of relief after the US leader declared “NATO is no longer obsolete” and praised the future of the Alliance during a meeting with Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg on April 12.

The increase in defense budget was agreed by NATO member countries in 2014 at the summit in Wales. According to the plan, the bloc will spend 2% of its total economic output in 2024 on the security sector. Thus, NATO has programmed a budget plan within 10 years but the US President wants to push it to happen sooner.

In fact, in 2015, only 5 countries complied with this regulation: Greece, Poland, Estonia, the UK and the US. In the 2015-2016 fiscal year, the US budget deficit reached 587 million USD and the public debt reached 19.8 trillion USD.

This is one of the main reasons why billionaire Trump feels it is time to cut down on the amount of money given to NATO, and at the same time require the 27 member countries to spend the exact amount of 2%/GDP as prescribed.

US President Donald Trump and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg at a joint press conference at the White House on April 12. Photo: Reuters

In fact, no NATO member in Europe wants to lose the protection of the United States, which contributes the most military spending to the bloc, accounting for about 70%. In 2016, the United States spent more on defense than all other NATO countries combined.

The Trump administration's threat to scale back commitments if there is no real progress has left European member states worried.

To deal with the possible bad situation, on November 10, 2016, President of the European Commission (EC) Jean-Claude Juncker called on the EU to establish a European army: “We have to thank the Americans very much… but they will not take care of European security forever. We have to protect ourselves, which explains why we need a new way to build an EU security whose ultimate goal is to establish a European army.”

The EU's difficulty

In fact, the leaders of NATO’s European member states understand that they need to take on more of their defense obligations. In fact, after the crisis in eastern Ukraine, European countries agreed to halt cuts in military spending and spending by at least 2% of GDP no later than 2024.

And there has been progress since then. Last year, 23 of the 28 NATO allies increased their spending. And next year, eight are expected to reach the 2% target.

But it must be said that NATO’s value as a military alliance is not just about how much attention its members pay to their defense budgets. NATO’s role is known in its most essential commitments when a member country is attacked. Then the bloc will take a joint action to show that commitment is clear.

For example, after the September 11 terrorist attacks, the alliance invoked Article 5 of the treaty and deployed early warning aircraft to assist the Bush administration. Since 2004, forces from other NATO member states have joined the US in many hot spots around the world, in joint exercises.

Soldiers of NATO member countries during a joint military operation. Photo: Reuters

The reality is that there are differences in the views of Europe and the United States on NATO contributions. Europe's concerns are not only focused on the militarization aspect of solving security issues. Europe has been struggling with a huge wave of immigration in recent years.

This has had unpredictable social and political consequences. It has led to the rise of far-right and populist parties, and a breakdown in trust between the ruling elite and the people. So the priority now must be to address the discontent and frustration of the European people first - those who have suffered from globalization, trade and immigration. Not many believe that increased defense spending will help solve practical economic and social problems on a daily basis.

European leaders also have principles when considering defense in the context of their national budgets. They must balance NATO commitments with their obligations as EU members. For example, the EU Stability and Growth Pact requires countries to keep their budget deficits below 3% of GDP.

NATO, meanwhile, requires its members to meet a target of 2% of GDP for defense spending. The difficulty will make many EU governments wary of requests to increase their contributions to NATO’s common defense budget.

NATO's unity and strength are being questioned. But strategically, the Alliance remains the military pillar of the US and Europe in the Atlantic security space. So the differences will only be short-term. The parties will continue to reconcile their interests to better suit the new context.

Thanh Son