NATO Excluding the US Increasing Military Spending by $100 Billion from 2016 to 2020

European NATO allies increased military spending in 2018, with big increases in the Baltics, Poland and the Netherlands. Overall European spending is up an hit a five-year high of 1.51 percent of GDP. Britain, Estonia, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland met the 2 percent goal, according to the NATO 2018 annual report. Bulgaria, the Baltics and the Netherlands added an extra 20 percent in 2018 compared to 2017. NATO’s European member states increased their defence budgets by 4.2% in real-terms in 2018. Their combined total spending would be US$264 billion. In 2020, the combined NATO Europe military spending will be about $270-290 billion. Europe’s largest economy, Germany, invested an additional €1.5 billion ($1.7 billion) in defense last year, raising the figure to almost €42 billion ($47 billion) and keeping its rate as a percentage of GDP stable at 1.23 percent. That leaves Germany at the lower end of the spectrum, with the US at 3.39 percent, while Belgium and Spain remain below 1 percent of economic output. Spending in Canada fell by almost 11 percent last year. In 2019 Russia’s total defense expenditure (which includes the secret services as well as the military) will be about 4.8-5 trillion rubles. Three trillion rubles is allocated to the military, and approximately two trillion more will be spent on the police and secret services. This would be about US$46 billion for Russia’s military. Russia is decreasing its military procurement and is failing to meet military modernization goals.

20 thoughts on “NATO Excluding the US Increasing Military Spending by $100 Billion from 2016 to 2020”

  1. Europe’s largest economy, Germany, invested an additional €1.5 billion ($1.7 billion) in defense last year, raising the figure to almost €42 billion ($47 billion) and keeping its rate as a percentage of GDP stable at 1.23 percent.

    So? It promised AGAIN to raise German military spending closer to 1.5% and eventually closer to 2.0%. But their recently released budget shows Berlin LIED.

    The SPD ‘coalition partner’ mucky-muck libtard Rolf Mützenich who engineered the stab in the back said, “If the US leaves NATO over it, it will be Trump’s fault not ours” in response to Germany getting flack FROM OTHER EUROPEAN NATO MEMBERS (not the US) over this. The NATO Secretary-General has even ripped Berlin a new one.

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/patience-wears-thin-among-germany-s-nato-allies-a-1260366.html

    Time for the US to at least close Ramstein AFB and relocate to a new base that Poland will spend $1 billion to build for us instead. All remaining US service personnel stationed in Germany should be pulled out as well. Besides, we’ll have an easier time securing US air combat mission overflight rights from Poland, Hungary, the Balkans and Romania than we we’ve been getting from Germany and Italy in recent post-Cold War decades.

    Reply
  2. They gave up on SU-57 as well. If ordering less than a dozen for the next 10 years is not giving up I don’t know what is.

    Reply
  3. The middle east has being getting bombs long before 2003. It’s a never ending shit hole. Which is why most American’s dont want the US involved in any wars their…It’s un-winable. Unless you want to devote SERIOUS money, lives, & time. (Name the shit hole country) would have to be invaded, liberated, then we would have to help setup democratic elections. All of which the US have done (and usually fail) many times before. Because again…commitment, lots and lots of it. American’s don’t have the will for it, since it’s on the other wide of the world. Typically, if they don’t develop nukes, the US stays out of their business.

    Reply
  4. They may be shifting that way. Their budgetary realities have forced them to invest primarily in defensive systems (AA and maintaining their nuclear arsenal) at the expense of force projection.

    Reply
  5. It seems as though Russia has largely abandoned the idea of carrier air wing. They don’t currently have any carrier based fighters under development and they don’t plan on having a carrier variant of the SU-57.

    Reply
  6. The entire civilized world has been asking Russia to stop bombing civilians in the Middle East but apparently you live on the moon.

    Reply
  7. The demographic problem is very real. You have to remember that you still need working age males to keep the lights on and to actually manufacture your tanks, jets, etc. Russia is doing ok now but ten years from now the picture will likely be very different for them.

    Reply
  8. Russian Navy may scrap its only aircraft carrier was reported by newspaper Izvestia, citing a source in the Russian Navy.  At the moment, Russia does not have the technical and financial possibilities to restore its old aircraft carrier and also to build a series of new ones.

    Reply
  9. ~1.7 trillion spent on increasing our chance of extinction. Imagine spending that on eliminating poverty, accelerating scientific endeavours, colonising the stars… What a waste!

    Reply
  10. It is not just spending, but what you get for that money. I bet China gets a whale of a lot more for their money than the US gets. Russia too. Europe is probably similar to the US maybe a little better.
    Conflict does not care about how much you dropped on your hovercraft and railguns it only matters how they contribute.

    Reply
  11. Old graphics show Russian spending before the big cut. Now even optimistic $ 46 bil puts Russian military spending at #10 behind Germany. Russian demographic crisis is now accelerated and population will come down to 100 billion by 2050.

    Reply

Leave a Comment