Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nato Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers, experts press NATO allies to raise defense spending ahead of Hague summit
Summary
At a House Subcommittee on Europe hearing, the chair and witnesses urged NATO members to increase defense budgets, debated summit targets (3.5%+1.5% proposal and calls for a 5% goal), and warned of persistent capability gaps despite recent European spending increases.
Chairman Self opened a House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Europe hearing by emphasizing funding as the central issue for the upcoming NATO summit in The Hague and said, “The first thing we have to start with is everyone pulling their weight in NATO.”
Why it matters: NATO defense spending determines alliance readiness and deterrence in Europe. Witnesses and members framed the summit as an opportunity to translate recent spending momentum into durable capability improvements and to close longstanding shortfalls among several major NATO economies.
Panelists described the status quo and competing summit proposals. Ambassador Julianne Smith said allies were “expected to announce a new commitment to spend 3.5% of GDP on hard defense and another 1.5% on related items like infrastructure.” Rear Admiral (Ret.) Mark Montgomery urged a more ambitious target, testifying that “we need to establish and maintain NATO defense spending targets at 5% of GDP.” Dr. Niall Gardner also urged higher national targets and said the Trump presidency’s pressure had catalyzed European attention to spending gaps.
Committee members and witnesses underscored differences among allies: several Eastern European countries now exceed 2% of GDP on defense, while some large economies — including France, Italy, Canada and Spain — remain below that benchmark. Montgomery and Gardner described the political and operational consequences of those shortfalls: readiness gaps, fragile industrial base capacity, and risks to NATO’s deterrent posture. Ambassador Smith cautioned that money alone is not enough and emphasized the need for a strategy to convert funding into interoperable capabilities.
Speakers also debated the appropriate accounting and targets. Montgomery urged that targets cover both “hard defense” and “defense enablers” such as logistics, industrial base investments and infrastructure needed for rapid reinforcement. Smith and other witnesses warned that without coordinated procurement and coproduction, higher spending could simply reinforce inefficiencies in Europe’s defense industrial base.
Discussion-only items included repeated requests for clearer definitions of the summit commitment and for copies of charts showing national GDP and share of defense spending. No formal committee votes or directives were recorded at the hearing.
Looking ahead: The subcommittee’s exchanges highlighted two near-term tests for the Hague summit — whether allies will sign onto the 3.5%/1.5% proposal under discussion and whether member states will pair funding increases with procurement and industrial cooperation to boost NATO’s collective capabilities.
