CanadaJimmy

Shows it on the right column, though it's not sorted by GDP.

Shard

Yes, I saw that. I'm just saying this graphical representation vastly overstates the US position. This is the kind of chart which convinces Trump voters that they are getting a raw deal. You simply can't expect a country like Lithuania to contribute a similar nominal amount to the US, so why present it that way.

Almost Canadian

% of GDP is % of GDP is it not, irrespective of the value of GDP.

I appreciate that each country's calculation may be based upon differing amounts of what is, and what is not, included. For example, Canadian media reported earlier this week that Canada's amount included military pensions including non military administrative staff's pensions too.

The simple fact of the matter is that NATO heavily relies upon the US and, if I was a US taxpayer, I would be pissed too. If you wish to be part of the organisation, you should spend what you have agreed to spend. If others elect to spend more, that is a matter for them, but you can't not pay what you agreed to and then feel offended when others point out you to that you are not pulling your weight.

BritInParis

I don't know but I can tell you that the UK includes military pensions in its figures to get it over the line. Even if the US does decide to include military healthcare in its figures I doubt that it would come to 2/3s of the US defence spending which would then bring into line with Germany's defence budget as a percentage of GDP. Trump is quite correct on this one.

BritInParis

Of course you can - it's a percentage of GDP - and on that basis the US is getting a raw deal.

jimf

Well there's more to him than the stint at Rothschilds. President of the Republic about 10 years ahead of schedule. Good at switching horses to get on.

https://jacobinmag.com/2017/07/emman...onomics-le-pen

Shard

Yes, that's why I said it's more relevant to visually display that, than the nominal value of expenditure.

Shard

Why is the US getting a raw deal? Are you being like Trump and wanting each country to fulfil it's 2% commitment? Is that all we're talking about here or am I missing something?

BritInParis

That’s all.

Shard

​​​​​​So why not graphically present the percentage figures (or both)? As it's presented, it's highly misleading.

Former Lancastrian

Perhaps this link might explain things

https://www.nato.int/cps/ro/natohq/topics_67655.htm

In 2006, NATO Defence Ministers agreed to commit a minimum of two per cent of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to spending on defence. This guideline principally serves as an indicator of a country’s political will to contribute to the Alliance’s common defence efforts.
Today, the volume of the US defence expenditure effectively represents some 67 per cent of the defence spending of the Alliance as a whole in real terms¹. This does not mean that the United States covers 67 per cent of the costs involved in the operational running of NATO as an organisation, including its headquarters in Brussels and its subordinate military commands, but it does mean that there is an over-reliance by the Alliance as a whole on the United States for the provision of essential capabilities, including for instance, in regard to intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance; air-to-air refuelling; ballistic missile defence; and airborne electronic warfare.

So IMHO the US is right in asking for all members to cough up the 2%.
Some will ask is NATO really needed today?
What would NATO look like without the US?

Pizzawheel

NATO is the enemy of the Warsaw Pact, and with that gone, I think the EU would be better of mobilising that EU army and ditching the yanks. Might be possible with the UK out of the picture.

Very true!

I don't think Canada will be taking on the US anytime soon...

I hadn't really thought about how much more the US spends on military personnel that comes out of normal budgets in civilized countries- like healthcare and pensions and stuff.... it would be interesting to see some "corrected" figures.

dave_j

I wasn't present, like all here, at the discussions in 2006 so I suspect the 2% figure was a political fudge.
One issue with this 2% GDP number is that not all NATO members aspire to world domination or have to defend the remnants of empire so don't have to factor this into their military expenditure.
So what can you buy with your 2%? If you're Iceland you can buy fishery protection vessels and if you're the UK then aircraft carriers fit the bill but if you're Montenegro they're of little use, so you buy other stuff. If you make it in-house then that's good otherwise you buy it from others but as Turkey has found out you can't pick and choose worldwide without consequences, and those new fighter jets you're told you need, well I guess the US will give you a good deal.
If Trump has said anything at all I agree with him that NATO's fulfilled it's purpose and needs to rethink itself but inertia is difficult to deal with.

scrubbedexpat091

Most likely not and one reason Trump does what he does, few stand up to him in public anyhow.

According to this link Oct 1, 2019 to Sept 30, 2020 the US is estimated to spend $989 billion on defense related stuff, and is the 2nd largest item in the federal budget with social security being the largest budget item.

Broken down its apparently:

$576 billion to base budget for the Dept of Defense.
$174 billion for overseas contingency operations for DoD to fight Islamic state group.
$93.1 billion to the VA
$51.7 billion to Homeland Security
$42.8 billion for the State Dept.
$16.5 billion to the National Nuclear Security Admin
$26.1 billion in OCO funds for the State Dept and Homeland Security


I guess it kind of boils down to what one considers defense spending, just what goes directly to the military or everything that is funded for defense.

So many different figures out there its hard to figure out which is correct, guess would take someone who can read and understand the entire budget line for line to really get a true picture, who knows either way a massive amount of money goes towards defense or defense related stuff.