President Trump’s disingenuous spending rhetoric hides sympathies for Russia

Mr. Trump agreed, arguing (as he has often since) that countries like Japan that host U.S. troops should pay a price for their privileges.

“There are many other countries, including NATO, that are making great use of this,” Trump said. “If you look at the amount of money we’re paying NATO, it’s completely disproportionate to what other countries are paying. And it’s ridiculous.”

In the nearly 40 years since then, President Trump’s rhetoric hasn’t changed much. What has changed are geopolitical realities and Trump’s own ambitions. As last weekend, President Trump is now capitalizing on the idea that NATO allies “owe” money to the NATO organization (no one does that) and his apparent sympathy for Russia and its President Vladimir Putin. It is used to hide.

Sign up for our weekly data newsletter How To Read This Chart by Philip Bump

It is no surprise that President Trump’s comments caused a huge backlash. Back in 2016, he expressed concern that NATO members were not contributing enough to the alliance. But over the weekend he suggested those who failed to do so would be left at Russia’s mercy.

“One of the presidents of a great country stood up and said, ‘Well, if we didn’t pay and the Russians attacked us, would you protect us?'” he said in the South. He made the claim during a rally in the Carolinas. “I said, ‘Did you not pay? Are you in arrears?’ He said, ‘Yes, let’s say that happened.’ No, I won’t protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever they want to do. Must be paid. you have to pay the bill. ”

It is important to point out that this framework is incorrect. It has been for many years that the United States has contributed the bulk of her NATO resources in terms of funds, personnel, and equipment. In 1987, at the end of the Cold War, while President Trump was speaking with CNN, the Congressional Budget Office released a report documenting the differences between the United States and other NATO members. At the time, NATO members were required to spend at least 3 percent of their annual gross domestic product on defense, but only the United States consistently met that level, the CBO report said. .

In 2006, 15 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, NATO allies set a new target of 2%. Five years later, only three of her countries had achieved her goal: the United States, Greece, and the United Kingdom. At the time Trump became the Republican nominee for president in 2016, five countries exceeded the 2% mark, despite some claims that the United States was gaining gross profits from the alliance. In 2022, he has 7 cases.

Please note that this is not an invoice that Member States pay to the Union. Rather, it is an effort to ensure that NATO is adequately resourced and prepared to carry out its mission. To oversimplify, you might think of it like setting aside 5% of your income to buy Christmas presents. If you fall short, it doesn’t mean you owe money. It means you have less than you expected.

Defense spending as a percentage of GDP is one of two goals NATO sets for its member states. Another is that the member spends his one-fifth of the defense budget on equipment, not on personnel and other items. Most members comply with this standard. In 2014 only 7 countries had more than 20% membership. Thanks to the surge in 2021 and 2022, nearly everyone will be in 2022.

Since 2014, NATO member states have, on average, increased both their relative spending on defense and the proportion of that spending on equipment. In 2014, NATO member states spent 1.4 percent of their national GDP on defense. By 2022 the average was 1.7%. In 2014, an average of 12.9% of defense spending was spent on equipment, increasing to 27.3% in 2022.

You can see the trends below, showing biennial averages and changes from 2014 to 2018 to 2022 by member country.

The country with the lowest defense spending as a percentage of GDP is Luxembourg, spending an estimated 0.6% of GDP in 2022. However, Luxembourg, with a population of about 640,000, spent the most on defense relative to its population. Norway came in second place, followed by the United States in third place.

But according to President Trump, this means Luxembourg and Norway (which spent an estimated 1.6% of their GDP on defense in 2022) are “not paying their bills.” So under President Trump, if invaded, they would clearly be at Russia’s mercy.

Notice that President Trump’s rhetoric toward America’s NATO allies has become more aggressive. in spite of Perhaps it has improved significantly that he feels very uncomfortable about their participation. He’s saying the same thing he said about NATO in 1987, despite changes in membership and how they participate in the alliance.

Now consider his approach to Russia. Of course, this was obvious back in 2016, as the businessman’s affinity for the Russian president was already evident.

But since then, Trump’s warmth toward dictators, especially Putin, has become even more pronounced. As Russia prepared to launch a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, President Trump was quick to praise Putin’s “genius.” After the invasion began, he called the move “wise.” Over the past two years, President Trump has continued to pivot his foreign policy around his worldview, arguing that U.S. aid to Ukraine is excessive or even that the U.S. should not antagonize Russia. Many parties have seen it.

Trump says things at his rallies that he believes will please his base. Lines about how NATO doesn’t pay its bills – a negative and disingenuous frame – have been used for years as a way to ignore America’s commitment to the alliance. But now, even as member states have improved relative to both NATO metrics and Russia’s hostile ambitions have become more evident, President Trump is pushing his rhetoric even further. “Let them do what they want.”

That’s obvious. The issue Mr. Trump is focused on is not ensuring the strength of NATO. Rather, it seems to be about being otherwise indifferent.