Spain has flatly rejected NATO’s proposed plan for member states to allocate 5% of their GDP to defence, with Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez branding the idea “unreasonable” in a fiery statement ahead of next week’s NATO summit in The Hague.
The Spanish leader’s comments have ignited a fresh debate within the alliance over the future of burden-sharing, drawing both praise and condemnation from fellow member states.
With defence spending already under strain across much of Europe, Sánchez’s intervention has thrown a spotlight on the growing divide between NATO’s eastern flank, which views increased defence budgets as essential, and southern and western capitals, where economic pressures and public scepticism make such targets politically toxic.
“The idea of raising defence spending to 5% of GDP is not only unrealistic, it is strategically misguided,” Sánchez told reporters during a press briefing in Madrid. “We support NATO, and we support collective security. But we also have responsibilities to our people, to healthcare, education, and rebuilding after the economic impact of the pandemic and inflation.”
Sánchez’s rebuke follows informal proposals reportedly floated by several NATO officials and backed by some eastern member states, including Poland and the Baltic nations, who see a substantial increase in spending as necessary to deter Russia. The current NATO baseline target is 2% of GDP – a goal Spain has yet to reach, despite pressure from the United States and other allies.
According to NATO’s 2024 figures, Spain spends approximately 1.3% of GDP on defence. Although Madrid has pledged to reach the 2% benchmark by 2029, Sánchez made clear on Thursday that going significantly beyond that figure is off the table.
“Our defence commitment must be proportional and sustainable,” Sánchez said. “We cannot equate fiscal responsibility with weakness. True strength lies in resilience – economic, social and military.”
The response from other NATO capitals has been swift. A senior Polish official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Madrid’s position reflects a “dangerous complacency” and risks sending “the wrong signal” to Moscow.
“We are on the frontline,” the official said. “If countries like Spain can afford to spend generously on social programmes but not on deterrence, then something is very wrong.”
In Berlin, the mood is more circumspect. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has not endorsed the 5% proposal and is thought to share Sánchez’s concerns, though Berlin has been more careful not to criticise eastern allies publicly. Germany, like Spain, has long struggled to meet the 2% goal, though the war in Ukraine has prompted a significant shift in defence thinking.
The proposal for a 5% target has no formal status and is unlikely to be adopted at next week’s summit. However, its very discussion reveals a growing ideological rift within NATO. The alliance, once focused primarily on military strategy, is now grappling with profound political and economic tensions among its members.
While countries bordering Russia or Belarus are understandably advocating for stronger deterrence, others argue that security must be viewed more broadly – incorporating energy independence, infrastructure resilience, and societal cohesion.
In Spain, Sánchez’s remarks have received a mixed reception. The opposition Partido Popular accused the prime minister of “diminishing Spain’s role in NATO” and playing populist politics with national security.
“Refusing to meet our responsibilities weakens the alliance and undermines Spain’s credibility,” said PP defence spokesman Juan Antonio Callejas. “You can’t have security on the cheap.”
Yet many on the Spanish left, including members of Sánchez’s own PSOE party and his coalition partners in Sumar, welcomed his stance. Yolanda Díaz, Spain’s deputy prime minister, said the 5% target was “an invitation to militarisation” that risked diverting funds from essential public services.
Outside of Spain, the backlash from hawkish Atlanticists is likely to grow louder. The United States, long frustrated by European underinvestment in defence, has not publicly commented on the 5% suggestion. But US officials have repeatedly signalled their desire for European allies to shoulder more of the burden, particularly as Washington turns its gaze increasingly toward the Indo-Pacific.
As The Hague Summit approaches, Sánchez’s firm position sets the stage for a potentially fractious meeting. While few expect a formal endorsement of the 5% proposal, the pressure to show unity in the face of Russian aggression remains acute.
For now, Sánchez is gambling that the European public, and a growing segment of NATO governments, will see wisdom in his defiance. Whether that gamble pays off may depend less on what is said in The Hague than on what happens next in Ukraine, Belarus, or the Black Sea.
