Sunday, September 07, 2025

 

LONG READ: Europeans face recession, financial crises, as they struggle to boost defence spending

LONG READ: Europeans face recession, financial crises, as they struggle to boost defence spending
Europe is getting ready to take up the mantle cast off by the US of protecting itself from a Russian attack, but it is facing huge spending increases at a time when economies are falling into recession and both France and Britain are teetering on the edge of IMF bailouts. / bne IntelliNews
By Ben Aris in Berlin September 4, 2025

ED - This article is part of a series looking at the affordability of increasing European defence spending and funding the war in Ukraine.

See the accompanying articles:

LONG READ: Europe can’t afford the Ukraine war

LONG READ: Europeans face recession, financial crises, as they struggle to boost defence spending

US President Donald Trump has dropped the burden of supplying and supporting Ukraine’s battle against Russia firmly in Europe’s lap. At the same time as the recent Nato summit in the Hague he demanded, and got, a commitment to increase spending on their own defence sectors to 5% of GDP, up from the 2% everyone has been ignoring for years. Soaring defence spending comes on top of soggy economic performance thanks to the cumulative pressure of ballooning polycrisis debt and the Russian sanctions boomerang effect. Europe is being driven into recession and now some of the leading powers are facing full blown financial crises.

The amount of money Europe needs to find is enormous. The cost of the war is running at an estimated $100bn a year, according to Timothy Ash, the senior sovereign strategist at BlueBay Asset Management in London. And since Trump took over Europe has taken on this entire burden.

 

The new Nato spending target is going to be phased over the years to 2036, but even raising spending to the more immediate goal of 3.5% of GDP that should specifically be spent on weapons will require additional spending of $250bn a year. European defence spending has already surged and this year is expected to overtake US spending for the first time since WWII. However, it will total €170bn vs US spending of €168bn, which is still less than the €250bn needed.

The German-led Zeitenwende, or military “change of the times,” is well under way and the question remains: will it be enough to meet Russia in the field?

In 2016 only three of the 32 Nato members were meeting the Welsh 2% of GDP spending requirement, imposed in 2014. Today 31 members spend that much, according to the latest Nato data, but to catch up with Russia, which is outpacing Europe in weapons production, spending needs to rise quickly to 3.5% in the short- to medium-term and most European governments are going to struggle to hit that target. To fund the increases, most member states will be forced to cut further into domestic spending as well as borrowing heavily – something that only a few countries like Germany and Poland can afford to do.

To ease the pain, Brussels is relaxing its borrowing cap rules, bring in the European Investment Bank (EIB) to make defence sector “loans” that won’t end up on the national balance sheet, and has rolled out a new one-time €150bn SAFE (Security Action for Europe) defence loans facility. Member states could raise another €650bn from the relaxed borrowing cap rules, after the European Commission (EC) activated the Stability and Growth Pact’s “national escape clause”, also dubbed “financial flexibility.” Together this will make up €800bn of defence spending through to 2030. But all this money is a one-off change that is spread out over five years, not the additional €250bn a year that is needed.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen admitted that currently Russia produces arms in three months that takes the EU and Ukraine combined a whole year to make in her ReArm speech (video) on March 4.

And that is just defence spending. The Draghi report from former Italian Prime Minister and ex-European Central Bank boss last year detailed how Europe has lost its competitive edge. He recommended that the EU invest €800bn per year to catch up or face falling inexorably behind the other leading economies of the world, dooming Europe to Argentina’s fate in the last century.

An important point to note is that Draghi’s call for €800bn of investment per year to improve Europe’s competitiveness has been lost in the noise of the need to rearm Europe. None of the governments in Europe earmarked cash for the heavy investment into innovation needed to catch up with either China or the US. What is being done are some bureaucratic reforms to improve the efficiency  or cut red tape, and trim the most onerous of the Green Deal regulations as agriculture makes up a third of EU budget spending. But these Draghi reforms, which should be front and centre, are peripheral at best and being largely ignored.

Even with the EU’s proposed total defence spending of €800bn over the next five years, the only way that member states can come up with the extra cash needed to cover procurement bills is to cut deeply into their domestic budget expenditures as well as borrow heavily.

Germany’s heavy lifting

As Europe’s biggest country and economy, Germany will have to do a lot of the heavy lifting in the ReArm programme. It has a standing army of slightly more than 200,000 active servicemen, with a long-term target of 300,000 under its expansion plans. There is even talk of reintroducing national service to bolster the numbers. But it would face a million-strong Russian invading force that the Kremlin says it wants to increase to 1.5mn. That is before Putin introduces a general mobilisation to draw on his 144mn-strong population, something he has been very reluctant to do so far.

As Europe’s richest country, even Germany is struggling financially. The economy has contracted for the last three quarters in a row and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz admitted in August that “solving the economic problems is proving tougher than we thought.” Caught between the rock of trying to take over the US mantle to protect Ukraine and the hard place of funding a stagnant and deindustrialising economy, Merz has no good options.

With a deficit of 2.5% of GDP and rising, the Chancellor is being forced to make cuts at home at the same time as is planning to invest €150bn into modernising the Bundeswehr and give Kyiv €50bn in aid. Even with new borrowing capacity, after the so-called Schuldenbremse, restrictions on government borrowing, were lifted just before he took office, Berlin is also strapped for cash.

Defence spending is currently at 2.4 % of GDP, and the Bundestag has already approved a significant €100bn of new defence spending that should allow it to hit the interim target of 3.5 % by 2029 via nearly €400bn of borrowing.

That is possible thanks to the relaxation of the constitutional Schuldenbremse restrictions and Germany’s moderate debt‑to‑GDP ratio of 69 %. But debt-to-GDP will rise fast and this still doesn’t produce much money for the modernisation investments Draghi is talking about. Interest payments could hit €71 bn annually by 2035, according to Bruegel and to move from 3.5 % to the full 5 % Nato target would require an additional €70–80bn of annual spending that would push debt-to-GDP up to 84 % by mid‑2030s.

Rise of the right

The attempt to rearm Europe is going to pour fuel on dissent and the rise of right-wing politics in Europe. "For the first time, populist or far-right parties are leading the polls in the UK, France and Germany, the latest sign of growing voter discontent across much of the continent following years of high immigration and inflation,” The Wall Street Journal reported on September 1.

Political pressure on Merz is already mounting. In August, German unemployment rose to its highest level in ten years. The number of out of work people topped the three-million mark for the first time since 2015 in July, “providing further evidence that a long period of economic stagnation eventually takes a toll on the labour market,” ING said in a note.

“A full reversal of previous US front-loading effects has pushed the German economy back into recessionary territory, and it looks increasingly unlikely that any substantial recovery will materialise before 2026,” Capital Economics also said in a note.

The country’s economy can no longer afford to finance the current social welfare system, Merz said last month and called for a review of the benefits system, which cost a record €47bn last year. He is mulling cuts to housing and child allowances, unemployment payments, family supplements, aid programs for the needy, and subsidies for caring for the sick and elderly. The right-wing AfD (Alternative für Deutschland) immediately drew their knives and has been roasting the Chancellor for prioritising Ukrainians over Germans: since February 2022, Germany has provided a total of €50.5bn to support Ukraine, about a third of the EU’s total contribution of €170bn, and a bit less than twice the amount the US has contributed.

Merz’s policies are a sharp reversal from former Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who attempted to balance the budget, announcing last year he was cutting Berlin’s contributions from €3bn a year in 2025 to $500mn for the next two years. Merz has promised to continue to provide Kyiv with more than €8bn annually in bilateral military aid until 2027.

The AfD came in in a strong second place in recent regional elections with 20% of the vote and now have overtaken Merz’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) in the polls, putting the pro-Russian party on track to win the next elections.

UK Ponzi scheme

Both France and the UK are already in deep financial trouble and will not be able to expand military spending by anywhere near what is needed.

UK long-term borrowing costs hit a 27-year high on September 2 as 30-year gilt yields surged to 5.7% — 15x higher than 2020 lows. Markets fear Labour is losing control of public finances: spending is set to climb above 60% of GDP while revenues fall below 40%, threatening to push debt above 200% of GDP by 2073, according to some economists.

“Britain's public finances are starting to resemble a Ponzi scheme,” Daily Telegraph columnist and bne IntelliNews contributor, Liam Halligan, said in a recent social media post. “This week's official fiscal report for June reveals that no less than four-fifths of the money the UK government is borrowing is now being spent on interest payments on existing debt.

The UK already pays more in debt servicing than for every spending item in the budget apart from health. Britain is heading towards a 1970s-style debt crisis, and a bailout from the IMF, The Sunday Telegraph reported in August.

The UK’s debt is becoming unsustainable, according to Halligan, while the lack of investment and innovation has left growth stagnant. Indeed, stagnation is already giving way to the even more damaging stagflation. Inflation is back up to near 4%, double the Bank of England target, yet the Old Lady of Threadneedle Street has been forced to cut rates because growth is flat. The mix of high debt, rising prices, and weak growth points to worsening stagflation that stymied the UK in the 1970s. The UK’s problems suggests a global bond crisis is spreading to the major developed world economies grappling with the polycrisis that includes the knock on effects of sanctions on Russia and Trump’s escalating trade war. The UK’s GDP per capita growth collapsed from 2.5% to 0.7% annually this year – the worst decline in the G7 except Italy.

“The root cause? Stagnant labour productivity, rising merely 6% since 2007 versus 22% in the US and 10% in the Eurozone,” Halligan said. “Neither Britain's market nor state functions effectively.”

Like Germany, British demagogues like Micheal Farage have leapt into the breach and are making political hay out of the economic collapse. Long a loonie fringe figure, Farage’s Reform UK party has emerged to top the polls and could also take power in the next elections.

“They peddle quick fixes: Brexit promises, unfunded tax cuts, and sovereignty myths. While moderates acknowledge the problems but avoid confronting the crisis's scale, preferring to manage the decline rather than reversing it,” Halligan says.

France’s IMF bailout

France is in even worse shape than the UK. Both France and the UK are in budget crises and both have said in the last two weeks they are facing Greek-like debt problems and may be forced into the humiliation of asking the IMF for a bail out loan – something more characteristic of an Emerging Market than a former Empire.

Finance Minister Eric Lombard is struggling with a record national debt of €3.3 trillion, a debt-to-GDP ratio of 113% and a budget deficit of 5.8%. It has no way to reduce any of these numbers. France has never required an IMF bailout before. Long-term borrowing costs have soared this week to their highest level since 2011, as investors’ confidence in the Elysée Place’s ability to deal with the mounting fiscal problems evaporates.

France’s deficit problem is so bad that after Prime Minister Francois Bayrou's gamble to win backing for his deeply unpopular debt-reduction plan backfired, his government looks certain to fall during a no-confidence vote on September 8.

He said of the IMF bailout on August 26: “It is a risk that we would like to avoid, and one that we should avoid. But I cannot tell you that this risk does not exist.”

Like Germany, France also ran out of money for Ukraine in October last year. It had also pledged €3bn a year but cut that to €2bn the Defence Minister Sébastien Lecornu said at the time. No new commitments have been made since. And like Germany and Britain, resentment at spending billions on Ukraine and not at home is rising.

France’s largest opposition party, the far-right National Rally, has its knives out too and called on President Emmanuel Macron to call new elections or resign ahead of the likely collapse of the government.

“Emmanuel Macron must recognise this institutional paralysis that he himself has caused and either dissolve the National Assembly or, obviously, submit his resignation,” Jordan Bardella, the president of Marine Le Pen’s National Rally said in an interview the same day.

“France's fragile coalition government looks set to lose a confidence vote scheduled on September 8. Consequently, Prime Minister François Bayrou's deficit target of 4.6% of GDP now seems dead in the water, and the next government's target will likely be much more modest, confirming our view that France cannot undertake meaningful fiscal consolidation in the current fractured political environment,” Oxford Economics said in a note. “Bayrou's failed gamble supports our view that there is no consensus on how to reduce France's deficit and no viable political path to achieve meaningful fiscal consolidation at present.”

The heart of the problem in Germany, France and the UK is, as Draghi highlighted, decades of complacency and underinvestment, thanks to the end of the Cold War “peace dividend” that hollowed out Europe’s power, despite its nominal size.

The European Union can no longer believe its big economy brings it global power and influence. “This year will be remembered as the year in which this illusion evaporated,” Draghi said in a speech in August.

Italy ignoring the problem

A right-wing party has already taken control of Italy, Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s Brothers of Italy, but she has been one of the more rational voices in the current debate on providing Ukraine with real security guarantees. While France and Britain are suggesting the unworkable option of a Nato-led “reassurance force”, Meloni has called for genuine bilateral “Nato-lite” security guarantees that include military commitments.

The Italian Army has an active strength of about 96,000 men and women, of which around 56,000 are fully operational combat soldiers assigned across its ten brigades. But when it comes to beefing up the military, Italy is in as bad a situation as France and Britain. Italy already spends the least in Europe on defence, only 1.6% of GDP. To get to Nato’s 3.5% target, Rome would need to increase spending by circa €60bn a year.

At the same time, it has the highest debt-to-GDP ratio of a major EU power of 137% that will make borrowing more to spend on arms next to impossible. If Rome did try to borrow to pay for military spending, then its debt‑to‑GDP would see one of the largest increases of all Nato members —in the range of 3 to 3.5 percentage points, according to Capital Economics estimates, from its already extremely high levels.

Interest payments already account for roughly 7.7 % of total government expenditure in 2024, according to Eurostat, which is slightly less than the UK’s 8.3%, but Italy runs a consistent current account surplus, due to things like tourism, taking the pressure off a little.

On the external side, Italy’s gross external debt reached €2.69 trillion in early 2025, slightly higher than at the end of last year and on a par with France.

Public finances are improving after a sharp setback in 2023, when the budget deficit swelled to 7.4% of GDP due to the reclassification of housing renovation incentives. Rome expects a budget deficit of 4.3% of GDP this year, 3.7% next year and 3.0% in 2026, although the country's finance minister has said much would depend on the European Union's new budget rules.

Following this summer’s Nato summit, defence spending is set to rise in line with the commitments to the Trump administration. Italy allocated around 1.5–1.6% of GDP to defence in 2024, but the government has pledged to lift this to 2% in 2025.

But Rome doesn’t seem to be taking the pledge to increase spending seriously. Part of the increase to 2% will be achieved by “accounting changes,” Meloni’s government says. At the same time Italian politicians are proposing to build a long-discussed €13.5bn bridge to Sicily, the world's longest suspension bridge, that they want to classify as “military infrastructure expenditure.” Critics complain the bridge doesn’t make sense as a military project and is just a way for Rome to pretend it’s boosting defence spending. The project has been the dream of the Romans, dictator Benito Mussolini and former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, but many say it will do nothing for Europe’s defence.

Poland & Finland

The only two countries that are anywhere near ready for a war with Russia are Poland and Finland. Both have been invaded by Russia before and both, unlike the rest of Europe, have kept themselves war-ready for years.

Finland maintains a standing army of around 20,000 men but thanks to compulsory national service can field a quarter of a million men. And its army is probably one of the best trained, best equipped armies in Europe.

Poland also takes its commitment to defence seriously and is in the process of building up the largest conventional army in Europe. It is already spending close to 5% of GDP on defence and will reach the new Nato target as soon as next year without breaking a sweat.

It has to take a Russian invasion seriously as it will almost certainly find itself in the front line and need to rebuff the initial attack. It has always been assumed that a Russia attack will form via Poland’s Suwałki Gap, a sparsely populated strip of land between Poland and Lithuania that separates Russia's Kaliningrad Oblast from Belarus - an Achilles’ heel for Nato. In addition to spending heavily on new equipment, Warsaw has recently also floated the idea of rehydrating its peatlands in the gap to bog down tank and troop movements in the mud.

And Poland has the money. The economy is forecast to be Europe's fastest growing economy this year, expanding by 3.5%. The economy is not perfect as its budget deficit is projected to be 6.5% of GDP this year – about three times higher than Russia’s – but the government is already working to bring the deficit down. Debt in Poland is also low as it is constitutionally capped at 60%, and currently a very modest 53.3% of GDP.

Finland spent above average 2.3% of GDP on defence, or $6.7bn in 2025. Fully mobilised Finland can field up to 300,000 men very quickly, making it one of the largest per capita defence forces in Europe.

Given that initial fighting will probably happen in northwest Europe, the combined Polish and Finnish armies will be able to significantly slow, or even stop, a Russian advance in its tracks - temporarily. But Putin’s “meatgrinder” tactics of simply and continuously throwing men into the frontline irrespective of the casualty rate to wear down the opposition thanks to Russia’s 150mn-strong population, mean that Poland will have to be reinforced fairly quickly.

The problems start if a conflict with Russia is protracted. Due to Europe’s stunted defence production capacity, if a conflict drags on then Russia’s wartime industrial base will prove to be a significant advantage. For example, according to British intelligence reports, the UK will start running out of ammunition in less than two months, whereas Russia is now producing more than it needs for the Ukrainian conflict and stockpiling the excess. After more than three years of supplying Ukraine, Western allies say they are already running low on ammo. Rheinmetall CEO Armin Papperger told CNBC last week that Europe must act “fast” to catch up with Russia’s artillery ammunition output.

 

Nato members military personnel (thousands)

         

Country

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024e

2025e

Albania

6.7

6.2

5.8

6.8

6.8

6.8

6.7

6.6

6.6

6.6

7

7.4

Belgium

30.5

29.7

28.8

27.8

26.5

23.3

22.8

22.1

21.4

21.4

21.3

21.3

Bulgaria

27.5

24.9

24.7

24.3

24.4

24.6

25

25.7

25.6

25.6

26.9

28.4

Canada

65.9

70.3

70.5

68.2

70.3

71.8

70.3

68.2

67.4

66.8

77.1

77.1

Croatia

15.4

15.1

14.8

14.8

15

14.8

14.7

14.9

14.4

14

13.7

15.2

Czechia

20.2

21.5

22.7

23.8

24.7

25.3

26.1

26.4

26.6

27.3

29.5

30.6

Denmark

16.9

17.2

17.3

16.7

17.1

16.3

16.9

16.9

16.7

17.3

17.3

17.3

Estonia

6.3

6

6.1

6

6.2

6.3

6.7

6.6

6.3

7.3

7.5

7.8

Finland

32.5

31

31.3

31

31.8

31.1

31.3

31.1

30.5

31

30.8

30.8

France

207

204.8

208.1

208.2

208.2

207.8

207.6

207.6

207.1

205.3

204.7

 

Germany

178.8

177.2

177.9

179.8

181.5

183.8

183.9

183.9

183.2

181.7

185.6

186.4

Greece

107.3

104.4

106

106.8

109.2

102.5

106.6

108.1

107.3

111

110.8

111.7

Hungary

17.5

17.4

17.9

18.7

19.9

18.9

19.8

20

19.7

20.1

20.9

21.6

Italy

183.5

178.4

176.3

174.6

174.1

176.4

173.4

170.3

170

170.7

171.4

171.2

Latvia

4.6

4.8

5.2

5.5

5.9

6

6.4

6.5

6.4

6.7

8.4

9

Lithuania

8.6

11.8

11.8

13.5

14.3

14.9

15.1

15.2

15.7

17.9

18.5

19.5

Luxembourg

0.8

0.8

0.8

0.8

0.9

0.9

0.8

0.9

0.9

0.9

0.9

0.9

Montenegro

1.9

1.7

1.5

1.5

1.5

1.5

1.9

1.6

1.6

1.7

1.6

2

Netherlands

41.2

40.6

40

39.5

39.3

39.7

40.4

40.9

40.6

41.1

41.9

42.5

North Macedonia

6.5

6.8

6.6

6.3

6.5

6.4

6.4

6.1

5.9

5.7

6.1

6.2

Norway

21

20.9

20.5

20.2

20.2

19.2

20.6

23.1

23.5

24

24.3

24.8

Poland

99

98.9

101.6

105.3

109.5

113.1

116.2

166.8

176

206.5

216.1

233.8

Portugal

30.7

28.3

29.8

27.8

26.9

23.8

23.7

25.3

22.5

21.4

24

24.9

Romania

65.1

64.5

63.4

64

64

64.5

66.4

68.6

66.7

64

66.6

69.3

Slovak Republic

12.4

12.4

12.2

12.2

12.2

12.7

13.1

13.1

13.2

13

15.6

16.9

Slovenia

6.8

6.6

6.5

6.3

6.2

6

6

6

5.8

5.8

5.9

6.1

Spain

121.8

121.6

121

117.7

117.4

117

118.7

118.7

117.3

116.3

117.4

118.2

Sweden

14.7

15

15

15.9

17.8

19.1

20.1

21.1

20.9

21.5

23.1

24.9

Türkiye

426.6

384.8

359.3

416.7

444.3

441.8

433

450

455.9

463.7

481

494.5

United Kingdom

168.7

141.4

139.5

149.4

146.6

144

147.3

148.2

143.6

138.1

138.1

 

United States

1338.2

1314.1

1301.4

1305.9

1317.4

1329.2

1346.7

1349

1317

1286

1300.2

 

NATO Europe and Canada

1890.8

1810.7

1788.3

1857.1

1893

1883.7

1896.7

1968.3

1968.2

2033

2114

1820.2

NATO Total

3228.9

3124.8

3089.8

3163

3210.5

3212.9

3243.4

3317.3

3285.2

3319

3414.2

1820.2

source: Nato

           

 

Nato defence expenditure per capita USD 

Country

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024e

2025e

Albania

68

60

59

62

67

76

75

79

82

125

128

159

Belgium

471

448

444

443

453

459

492

540

625

636

695

1090

Bulgaria

126

125

130

132

162

366

180

187

216

270

282

306

Canada

520

620

598

755

691

692

707

667

642

701

763

1052

Croatia

248

248

236

255

251

272

266

351

346

331

384

431

Czechia

218

248

235

267

292

321

333

372

357

364

574

568

Denmark

704

693

731

741

845

866

897

903

961

1433

1663

2400

Estonia

431

461

484

496

512

537

590

563

589

788

876

892

Finland

721

721

724

726

734

778

799

749

907

1125

1263

1478

France

764

753

762

772

797

811

817

834

835

877

924

940

Germany

577

581

596

627

642

699

752

746

776

841

1041

 

Greece

429

447

466

467

509

500

539

750

856

627

637

678

Hungary

127

139

158

197

176

245

308

250

364

404

423

418

Italy

393

370

416

432

445

428

530

559

579

573

587

793

Latvia

155

179

257

299

406

403

417

435

467

624

708

803

Lithuania

157

209

283

347

418

447

462

467

595

649

755

1008

Luxembourg

475

535

503

647

651

718

737

635

757

942

1073

1780

Montenegro

122

117

122

121

129

131

145

147

139

159

185

226

Netherlands

613

612

637

646

697

768

779

796

873

998

1249

1570

North Macedonia

69

69

66

62

68

87

90

111

124

135

157

172

Norway

1361

1411

1550

1551

1563

1689

1769

1558

1384

1713

2143

3191

Poland

257

318

295

294

331

341

375

407

435

647

774

948

Portugal

293

304

296

300

334

351

333

375

364

354

424

545

Romania

151

168

171

226

249

266

282

276

274

256

353

378

Slovak Republic

181

214

219

223

256

366

398

378

402

416

454

486

Slovenia

236

230

256

263

282

302

289

362

389

402

421

637

Spain

264

276

247

284

296

293

288

313

367

382

478

676

Sweden

596

582

563

566

573

621

636

868

908

1029

1413

1553

Türkiye

109

109

117

129

157

160

162

154

136

156

231

258

United Kingdom

971

934

971

985

1004

1006

1016

1069

1105

1086

1125

1164

United States

2345

2262

2276

2178

2214

2422

2432

2479

2332

2294

2419

2469

NATO Europe and Canada

466

472

483

510

527

545

568

583

602

647

752

868

NATO Total

1119

1095

1108

1092

1116

1201

1220

1248

1209

1222

1329

1423

source: Nato

           

 

Nato national defence spending share of GDP %

Country

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024e

2025e

Albania

1.33

1.15

1.09

1.1

1.15

1.27

1.29

1.24

1.2

1.75

1.7

2.01

Belgium

0.97

0.91

0.9

0.89

0.89

0.89

1.01

1.04

1.16

1.18

1.29

2

Bulgaria

1.31

1.25

1.24

1.22

1.45

3.14

1.59

1.51

1.59

1.94

1.95

2.06

Canada

1.01

1.2

1.16

1.44

1.3

1.29

1.41

1.27

1.2

1.33

1.47

2.01

Croatia

1.81

1.75

1.59

1.63

1.54

1.6

1.7

1.97

1.8

1.67

1.87

2.03

Czechia*

0.94

1.02

0.94

1.02

1.09

1.16

1.27

1.35

1.29

1.32

2.08

2

Denmark*

1.15

1.11

1.15

1.14

1.28

1.3

1.37

1.29

1.36

2

2.27

3.22

Estonia*

1.9

1.99

2.03

1.97

1.97

2

2.26

2.02

2.14

3

3.37

3.38

Finland

1.46

1.46

1.43

1.39

1.4

1.46

1.54

1.41

1.69

2.12

2.4

2.77

France

1.82

1.78

1.79

1.78

1.81

1.82

1.99

1.9

1.87

1.94

2.03

2.05

Germany*

1.16

1.16

1.18

1.21

1.23

1.33

1.49

1.43

1.48

1.61

2

 

Greece

2.24

2.32

2.4

2.37

2.52

2.42

2.87

3.66

3.87

2.76

2.74

2.85

Hungary

0.86

0.9

1

1.19

1

1.33

1.75

1.32

1.83

2.05

2.13

2.06

Italy

1.13

1.06

1.17

1.19

1.22

1.17

1.58

1.52

1.5

1.47

1.5

2.01

Latvia*

0.97

1.07

1.49

1.65

2.13

2.09

2.23

2.16

2.25

2.97

3.36

3.73

Lithuania*

0.88

1.13

1.48

1.71

1.95

1.98

2.05

1.95

2.44

2.71

3.09

4

Luxembourg

0.37

0.41

0.38

0.49

0.5

0.55

0.58

0.47

0.56

1.06

1.19

2

Montenegro

1.5

1.4

1.42

1.34

1.37

1.33

1.73

1.55

1.38

1.52

1.72

2.03

Netherlands

1.12

1.1

1.13

1.12

1.19

1.29

1.37

1.32

1.39

1.6

2

2.49

North Macedonia

1.09

1.05

0.97

0.89

0.94

1.16

1.24

1.45

1.58

1.68

1.89

2

Norway*

1.54

1.58

1.73

1.71

1.72

1.84

1.97

1.68

1.46

1.82

2.27

3.35

Poland*

1.86

2.21

1.99

1.88

2

1.96

2.21

2.19

2.21

3.27

3.79

4.48

Portugal

1.31

1.33

1.27

1.24

1.34

1.37

1.43

1.52

1.39

1.33

1.58

2

Romania*

1.35

1.45

1.43

1.73

1.79

1.83

2

1.85

1.75

1.6

2.17

2.28

Slovak Republic

0.98

1.11

1.11

1.1

1.22

1.7

1.9

1.71

1.8

1.84

1.96

2.04

Slovenia

0.98

0.94

1.02

0.99

1.02

1.06

1.07

1.24

1.3

1.32

1.37

2.02

Spain

0.92

0.92

0.8

0.9

0.92

0.9

1

1.02

1.14

1.16

1.43

2

Sweden*

1.07

1.02

0.98

0.98

0.98

1.04

1.1

1.43

1.48

1.68

2.31

2.51

Türkiye

1.45

1.38

1.45

1.51

1.82

1.85

1.86

1.61

1.36

1.48

2.13

2.33

United Kingdom

2.14

2.03

2.09

2.08

2.1

2.08

2.35

2.29

2.27

2.25

2.33

2.4

United States

3.71

3.51

3.49

3.28

3.25

3.49

3.61

3.48

3.21

3.1

3.21

3.22

NATO Europe and Canada

1.4

1.4

1.41

1.45

1.48

1.51

1.69

1.63

1.63

1.74

1.99

2.27

NATO Total

2.56

2.46

2.46

2.37

2.38

2.52

2.69

2.59

2.44

2.44

2.61

2.76

source: Nato

           

 

Nato national defence spending USD - millions

Country

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024e

2025e

Albania

178

132

131

145

176

197

197

224

231

409

463

570

Belgium

5200

4204

4258

4441

4845

4761

5324

6245

6904

7622

8548

13739

Bulgaria

747

633

671

724

962

2159

1121

1276

1440

1992

2193

2389

Canada

18172

18689

17708

23700

22399

22572

23330

25502

25898

28435

32334

43886

Croatia

1078

892

837

917

952

986

983

1361

1285

1410

1731

2006

Czechia*

1975

1921

1866

2259

2750

2982

3199

3915

3895

4538

7176

7223

Denmark*

4057

3364

3593

3780

4559

4487

4886

5274

5473

8143

9631

14303

Estonia*

514

463

497

541

615

637

719

749

820

1238

1424

1504

Finland

3991

3401

3418

3536

3825

3900

4156

4145

4726

6266

7228

8587

France

52022

43496

44209

46134

50507

49493

52519

56457

52238

59433

64469

66531

Germany*

46176

39833

41606

45470

49772

52549

58652

62054

61405

73138

93747

 

Greece

5234

4520

4637

4752

5388

5019

5492

8006

8488

6731

7075

7673

Hungary

1210

1132

1289

1708

1615

2190

2767

2410

3270

4360

4736

4807

Italy

24487

19576

22382

23902

25641

23559

30084

33140

31512

33856

35384

48800

Latvia*

294

282

403

485

710

692

743

824

857

1254

1440

1653

Lithuania*

428

471

636

817

1057

1094

1176

1308

1738

2165

2626

3607

Luxembourg

253

250

236

326

356

381

426

403

461

642

783

1350

Montenegro

69

57

62

65

75

74

83

91

86

114

138

174

Netherlands

10349

8673

9112

9643

11172

12067

12838

13916

13899

16764

21858

28107

North Macedonia

124

105

104

101

120

146

154

204

221

265

315

358

Norway*

7722

6142

6431

6850

7544

7536

7228

8438

8694

8799

10792

16490

Poland*

10107

10588

9397

9940

11857

11824

13363

15099

15338

26475

34454

44314

Portugal

3007

2645

2616

2738

3249

3299

3273

3899

3578

3854

4849

6391

Romania*

2695

2580

2646

3650

4363

4607

5056

5299

5197

5607

8312

9308

Slovak Republic

999

987

1004

1056

1298

1802

2049

2066

2090

2445

2800

3094

Slovenia

487

401

449

477

547

572

568

763

777

911

980

1513

Spain

12634

11096

9975

11889

13200

12630

12828

14849

16451

18875

24555

35670

Sweden*

6205

5103

5017

5229

5396

5560

5984

9071

8562

9849

13967

15207

Türkiye

13597

11995

12642

12972

14486

14086

13339

12969

12291

16766

28274

32573

United Kingdom

65692

59505

56362

55719

60380

59399

63500

71927

70846

76052

84169

90508

United States

653942

641253

656059

642933

672255

750886

770650

824094

834977

858000

935000

980000

NATO Europe and Canada

289314

254473

255594

275101

300474

301656

325896

358668

355382

418559

516453

607999

NATO Total

943256

895726

911653

918034

972729

1052542

1096546

1182762

1190359

1276559

1451453

1587999

source: Nato

           

 

 

US and Taiwan quietly hold defence talks in Alaska as Trump balances China ties

US and Taiwan quietly hold defence talks in Alaska as Trump balances China ties
/ bno IntelliNews
By bno - Taipei Office September 5, 2025

Senior defence officials from the United States and Taiwan met in secret last week in Anchorage, Alaska the UK’s Financial Times has reported, in a move that all but proves Washington’s delicate balancing act between support for Taipei and efforts to preserve fragile negotiations with Beijing.

The discussions brought together Jed Royal, the Pentagon’s acting Indo-Pacific chief, and Hsu Szu-chien, at the time Taiwan’s deputy national security adviser. Hsu has since been promoted to a more senior advisory post and is seen as a likely candidate to serve as Taipei’s next ambassador to Washington the report adds.

The meeting came only weeks after a higher-level gathering originally planned for Washington was cancelled and comes at a time Taiwan is seeing increased Chinese moves against the island nation with daily manoeuvres by the PLA air and naval forces in the skies and waters around Taiwan.

That session would have included Taiwan’s defence minister, Wellington Koo, and senior US defence policy official Elbridge Colby. The Trump administration halted the talks at the last minute, citing the fallout from strikes on Iran, though some within Washington feared that hosting a serving Taiwanese defence minister in the US capital could jeopardise a potential summit between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping.

Instead, the scaled-down encounter in Alaska was designed to lower the profile of US-Taiwan engagement at a time when both Washington and Beijing are pursuing a possible October summit in Beijing alongside continuing trade negotiations the FT says. That it took place at all will be seen in some quarters as a message to Beijing, however, that should trade talks not be seen as successful by the US, then moves could be made to bolster Taiwan’s defences further.

Demonstrating the sensitivity of the talks with both Taiwan and China, American officials have reportedly been instructed to avoid new punitive measures against China, such as tightening export controls, in order to keep the talks on track.

The episode also reflects a broader tension in US policy. On the one hand, there is a recognised strategic need to maintain regular senior-level contacts with Taipei, particularly as China showcases its growing military power. On the other, Trump has sought to keep channels with Xi open, often showing personal ambivalence towards Taiwan while prioritising trade outcomes and cultivating ties with authoritarian leaders.

Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te faces a more difficult landscape than his predecessor, Tsai Ing-wen, who enjoyed close relations with both Trump’s first administration and President Joe Biden’s team. Lai’s officials have been working to counter perceptions of waning American backing, while emphasising Taiwan’s readiness to shoulder more of its own defence burden. In doing so, Taipei has recently announced a record defence budget, proposing a 23% rise that would lift military spending to more than 3.3% of GDP next year. The plan, however, is more than likely to face resistance from opposition Kuomintang lawmakers who control the legislature.

For Taipei, the Alaska talks were also a matter of timing. Officials wanted discussions concluded swiftly enough to support a special budget submission for arms purchases, while Washington was finalising its own national defence strategy.

The Pentagon and Taiwan’s government have both declined to comment publicly on the Anchorage meeting the FT says. Yet the decision to downgrade the format of talks illustrates the extent to which Taiwan’s security is being weighed against Washington’s efforts to manage relations with Beijing – a factor few in Taiwan will be pleased with when news of the talks hits the mainstream media.

 

US to draw back from Asia in new defence policy concept

US to draw back from Asia in new defence policy concept
The US is giving up on preparing for a military showdown with China and instead will focus on domestic security. That is also bad news for Ukraine. / bne IntelliNews
By Ben Aris in Berlin September 6, 2025

The United States is scaling back its strategic focus on Asia, marking a potential end to over a decade of military and political efforts to counterbalance China’s rise in the region, Politico reports.

A draft of the Pentagon’s latest National Defence Strategy, has been delivered to the newly retitled Secretary of War and Pentagon Chief Pete Hegseth.

US President Donald Trump has signed a decree renaming the Ministry of Defence to the Department of War on September 5. He added that the new name was much more appropriate given the current state of the world.

"That’s a big one," Trump said after signing the decree.

According to Hegseth, the return of the WWII-era name will allow the department he heads to fight decisively and prevent endless conflicts. A Department of War existed from 1789 to 1947, when it was renamed after the conclusion of WWII.

However, the new focus of the draft concept represents a dramatic shift in policy. Previously, Hegseth said that the US should withdraw from all its external military obligations, but “get ready for war with China.” The new draft suggests abandoning the China effort and withdrawing from engaging there as well.

“The Pentagon's latest National Defence Strategy - which draft just landed on the Defence Secretary's desk - is de-prioritizing "deterring China" in favour of focusing on the US homeland and the Western hemisphere,” political commentator Arnaud Bertrand and bne IntelliNews columnist said in a social media post.

“In fact the focus on its homeland in the new National Defence Strategy means that the US isn't only withdrawing from Asia but implementing a full-on strategic retreat on all fronts,” Bertrand added.

The new strategy is also very bad news for Ukraine as it will only reinforce Trump’s growing reluctance to supply Ukraine with either money or weapons. The EU has tasked with the burden now, but as bne IntelliNews reported, Europe can’t afford to take over the burden of supporting Ukraine, either financially or in terms of military supplies as most EU countries are either in recession or approaching a crisis.

At the coalition of the willing Paris summit on September 4 was the most recent sign of the breakdown in relations between Trump and Europe as a telephone call between the leaders ended in disaster, when the US president turned the tables on the COW leaders and demanded they buy less Russian oil and should pressure China to do the same.

US Secretary of Defence Lloyd Austin on September 5, called for a significant shift in emphasis away from deterring China and instead prioritises defence of the US homeland and the Western Hemisphere.

The new draft has been championed by Eldridge Colby, who has been increasingly driving US security policy. He was the one behind Hegseth's order in July to halt all weapons supplies to Ukraine arguing the US stockpile had fallen below critical levels needed to ensure US security. Trump reversed the order a week later following an international outcry.

Colby' s earlier book The Strategy of Denial advocated a muscular approach to China, but faced with the realities on ground he seems to have changed his mind. Bertrand noted the apparent contradiction, saying, “Now that he is in power and has access to actual intelligence, he must have understood how futile the effort would be.”

Earlier Bertrand drew from the work of Australian military strategist Hugh White to suggest that the US had already started stepping back from the region. He described the move as “only a matter of time before it would be made official, which is what the Pentagon is apparently now doing.”

Bertrand also linked the shift to broader American retrenchment under Trump, whom he credited with recalibrating the country’s global posture.

“Fact is, as I keep arguing, you can only deny structural realities for so long and it’s a fool’s errand to expect that you can project power indefinitely 7,000 miles from home,” Bertrand said. He added that the shift reflects an overdue recognition that the US cannot dominate regions “in the backyard of nations that increasingly surpass you in all the metrics that matter.”

While many in Washington may frame the new strategy as a necessary recalibration, Bertrand concluded, “Trump undoubtedly won’t be remembered for making ‘America great again’ but he may be remembered for making America realistic again.”

The new more timid policy comes only a few days after Chinese President Xi Jinping held a large-scale military parade in Beijing as part of the recent SCO summit where top leaders from the Global South attended. The parade was an impressive show of force and highlighted the rapid progress China has made in modernising its army in recent years.

The Beijing parade was also attended by Russian President Vladimir Putin as the guest of honour who has also modernised his army into a major force in Europe as a consequence of the Ukraine conflict. Putin also hosted Xi in Moscow at his own Victory Day parade on May 9, where Russia also put on an impressive display of force.

The war in Europe and the growing military tensions with China in the South China Sea have unsettled analysts as Moscow and Beijing draw closer together with their increasingly powerful armies. Recently a Chinese decoy drone was found on the Ukrainian battlefield for the first time and while China is not yet supplying Russia with military tech, clearly both Russia and China are working increasingly closely together and using the Ukraine war to drive more weapons innovation.

Russia, China focus on Eurasia

The growing intimacy between Moscow and Beijing started as a marriage of convenience but it is becoming increasingly ideological as they developed shared goals.

Russia also revised its foreign policy concept in March 2023, sharply changing the language, abandoning an attempt at relations with “partners” in the West and refocusing on building up ties with Eurasia.

Likewise, Chinese President Xi Jinping has pushed the Chinese concept of Tianxia (everything under heaven) in his policy planning that includes a focus on expanding ties and relations with Eurasia that is also part of the latest Five-Year Plan, a goal that overlaps with Russia’s goals.

Tianxia envisions a world order where China is the paramount "civilization power," radiating influence to ensure global peace and prosperity in a “Community with a Shared Future for Mankind”, which he first articulated in 2013. Xi’s foreign policy, often described as “major country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics,” draws on these ideas to project China’s leadership globally.

This focus on Eurasia was in focus only last week at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit where all the leaders of the Central Asian countries joined Xi, Putin, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and other leaders of Emerging Markets, largely in Asia for the event. The SCO was originally founded 24 years ago to improve security in Central Asia, but since it has come of age and is now a much broader platform for China and Russia to promote their Eurasian ambitions. China has implemented these policies with the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and has seen billions of dollars invested in partner countries.

 

 

Half of Poles now against Ukraine joining Nato – poll


Half of Poles now against Ukraine joining Nato – poll
Just over half of all Poles area against Ukraine's membership of Nato, up from 40% two years ago, according to a new poll. / bne IntelliNews
By bne IntelliNews September 6, 2025

Just over half of Poles (53%) are now against Ukraine joining Nato, while only a third (33.5%) support the idea, according to to a recent poll conducted by the IBRiS institute for the Polish newspaper Rzeczpospolita on August 29-30.

As the war drags into its fourth year, there is a growing scepticism among Poles who have become more polarised regarding Ukraine’s potential Nato membership, with only 13.8% remain undecided. This marks a notable shift from an earlier poll in August 2023, where 47.7% opposed Ukraine’s immediate Nato admission and 40% supported it.

The poll, which surveyed 1,069 respondents using the Computer-Assisted Telephone Interview (CATI) method, highlights a deepening divide in Poland.

Washington signals end to military aid for Russia’s neighbours, Baltics to feel brunt

PUTIN'S PUPPET

Washington signals end to military aid for Russia’s neighbours, Baltics to feel brunt
Loss of troops deployed to defend the Baltic states against possible hostile actions from Russia would be a considerable blow to Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. / @LTU_Army
By bne IntelliNews September 5, 2025

The United States is preparing to halt military support for European states bordering Russia, several American outlets reported this week. BNS, a Lithuanian news agency, and LRT.lt, picked up on the US reports on September 5.

If confirmed, the move would be a major blow to the three Baltic states. They have long relied on the US for their security. The reports followed commitments made on September 3 by US President Donald Trump to Polish President Karol Nawrocki to keep American troops in Poland and perhaps even build up the forces.

The Washington Post cited six sources confirming the plan that would hit deployments in the Baltic states, saying it could strip hundreds of millions of dollars from programmes designed to counter Moscow. The Financial Times ran a similar report, noting that training and equipment schemes for Eastern European armies would be wound down.

“America has been trying to reduce its footprint in Europe for some time, and this is one of the ways. The fact that Nato countries have started to increase their defense spending and strengthen their armies makes America more confident. Certainly, the Baltic States do not welcome this, but it is inevitable, as China is America’s top priority. Looking ahead, US involvement in European affairs will continue to shrink,” Kestutis Girnius, a prominent Lithuanian political scientist and associate professor in the Department of Political Philosophy and History of Ideas at Vilnius University’s Institute of International Relations and Political Science (TSPMI), told bne IntelliNews.

While officials across the continent have been warned of the impending cut, Lithuania’s Defence Ministry says no official paperwork has arrived in Vilnius, BNS and LRT.lt reported on September 5.

Vaidotas Urbelis, the ministry’s Director of Policy, told reporters on September 5 that Washington had outlined its intentions in briefings but not in writing.

“Last week the Pentagon made clear that, starting from the new fiscal year, this budget line will be brought down to zero for all European countries…There is no formal letter. We only have conversations and fragments of information. The budget itself has not been passed, so final sums will only be known once Congress adopts it and the president signs. That will take months,” he said, BNS and LRT.lt reported.

The future of the Baltic Security Initiative – launched in 2020 to boost the armed forces of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia – now looks uncertain. Congress earmarked $228mn for the scheme last year, but the White House did not include follow-on funding in its next spending plan.

Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kestutis Budrys on September 4 welcomed remarks from US President Donald Trump suggesting Washington could bolster its military presence in Poland.

“The more links we have in the region, the more assurances of allied ties we receive here, the better it is,” Budrys told Ziniu Radijas radio, BNS and LRT.lt reported.

Around 8,000 American troops are currently based in Poland, with a further 1,000 stationed in Lithuania.

 

Slovakia’s Fico meets Ukraine’s Zelenskiy and delivers a message from Putin, opening indirect talks between the two presidents

Slovakia’s Fico meets Ukraine’s Zelenskiy and delivers a message from Putin, opening indirect talks between the two presidents
Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy in Uzhgorod to talk about energy and the peace process. / bne IntelliNews
By Ben Aris in Belrin September 5, 2025

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy in Uzhgorod, close to the Slovak-Ukrainian border, on September 5 and delivered a message from Russian President Vladimir Putin in what could be an  indirect approach  to start talks between the two presidents. 

Zelenskiy said they discussed the path to a peaceful settlement of the war in Ukraine and post-war security guarantees, as well as Europe’s energy independence. "Russian oil, just as Russian gas, has no future," Zelenskiy said, referring to Ukraine’s recent bombing of Russian pipelines delivering oil and gas to Central Europe.

Zelenskiy described the conversation with Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico as “substantive.”

“Thank you for the meeting. It is important that we have this dialogue, and we will continue it,” Zelenskiy said.

The meeting, which took place in the western Ukrainian city, are the first confirmed attempts by Putin to communicate directly with Zelenskiy at a time when US President Donald Trump has been trying to bring Putin and Zelenskiy together for direct talks to halt the conflict in Ukraine.

“Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy today in Uzhgorod, near the Slovak-Ukrainian border,” a joint statement released after the talks said giving no more details.

Fico has just returned from the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Tianjin in China where he had a one-on-one meeting as the only member of the EU to travel to attend the event.

Fico is along with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban one of the few EU leaders sympathetic to Russia and has constantly called for an end to the hostilities through dialogue. Trump’s efforts to organise a face-to-face meeting between Zelenskiy and Putin seem to have stalled. Putin on September 4 said he is still open to a meeting and invited Zelenskiy to come to Moscow, but Bankova (Ukraine’s equivalent of the Kremlin) rejected that offer out of hand.

In China, Fico told Putin that he wants normalised relations with Russia. Slovakia remains heavily dependent on Russian energy imports.

“Let’s go back to what used to be typical for countries when it comes to economic cooperation,” Fico told Putin, “for the safe and regular gas supplies that we receive through TurkStream,” alluding to the recent halts in oil imports via the Russian Druzhba oil pipeline for which Fico’s left-right government blamed Ukraine.

The approach by Putin via Fico comes as a coalition of the willing Paris summit on September 4 ended in failure after the top EU leaders called Trump at the end of the discussion to seek the White House’s support for their plan to send a peacekeeping mission to Ukraine if hostilities cease. Trump turned the tables on the COW leaders and berated them for continuing to import Russian oil and “funding the war.”

No details of the message delivered by Fico have leaked, but Putin has repeatedly said he wants a deal that deals with the “root causes” of the conflict and reflects the “realities on the ground. Analysts take that to mean Russia is seeking a wider reset of security arrangements in Europe that include not only security guarantees for Ukraine but for Russia as well. It also probably means that Putin wants western recognition of Russian sovereignty over the five occupied Ukrainian regions, a no-Nato guarantee from Ukraine and significant sanctions relief.

Energy row

Part of the discussions covered Slovakia's energy dependence on Russia that is causing friction with the EU that wants to wean itself off Russian oil and gas supplies completely

“America wants to seriously cut Russia’s income from energy exports — and that is the right path,” Zelenskiy said in a video address to an economic forum in Italy just before meeting Fico. “We will also discuss this issue with Fico.”

Following Fico’s meeting with Putin earlier in the week, he said his government is "extremely interested" in developing relations with Moscow and continuing to buy Russian oil and gas.

The two leaders also discussed the current efforts by the coalition of the willing to thrash out security guarantees for Ukraine and Zelenskiy claimed Slovakia "will not stand aside" while other European countries pledged post-war support. It is unclear what role Fico's government might play in those arrangements.

Zelenskiy also said that Slovakia supports Ukraine in its stalled EU accession bid in contrast to Hungary, which is actively blocking the process. Zelenskiy also said they talked about directions for bilateral cooperation in the economy, energy, and infrastructure. According to him, Slovakia will “not stay on the sidelines” and will “actively participate in the joint progress.”

“Slovakia supports Ukraine in its move toward the European Union. This is very significant. We also see that Ukraine and Moldova must continue moving together toward EU membership. It is also important that bilateral cooperation in economic, energy, and infrastructure matters here in our region strengthens our peoples, our countries,” Zelenskiy said in a statement.