Is NATO still relevant?

Former US President Donald Trump’s recent remarks about the US commitment to stay as a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) have rekindled a critical debate about defense expenditures and collective security. Trump’s language, although frequently controversial, highlights serious worries about equitable burden-sharing among NATO member states and the alliance’s overall survivability in an increasingly complicated geopolitical scenario.

Trump’s claim that the United States will only come to the assistance of NATO partners if they “play fair” raises serious concerns about the ideals that underpin the founding treaty. While reiterating his commitment to the alliance, Trump’s demand for equitable burden-sharing mirrors long-held opinions in American political debate.

NATO’s aim of members allocating 2 percent of their gross domestic product (GDP) for military spending has been a contested benchmark since its inception in 2014. As of mid-2023, only a small proportion of NATO nations had fulfilled or exceeded this target, with significant disparities within the alliance.

According to 2023 data, NATO’s top five countries in terms of defense spending are the United States ($800.2 billion), France ($292.4 billion), United Kingdom ($82.8 billion), Italy ($70.4 billion) and Germany ($61.5 billion).

Distilled to its essence, what Trump was saying was that NATO countries should put their money where their mouths are, or that they should walk the talk, instead of piggybacking on other NATO countries when it comes to defending against aggression, like in the event Russia’s invasion of Ukraine spirals into a bigger conflict with NATO neighbors.

As NATO conducts the most important makeover of its collective defense since the Cold War, resolving gaps in defense expenditure becomes critical in strengthening the alliance’s cohesiveness and deterrent capabilities. Trump may well be the next US President and, depending on whether spendthrift NATO allies would loosen their pursestrings, he may be singing, “Should we stay, or should we go?”

“NATO’s aim of members allocating 2 percent of their gross domestic product (GDP) for military spending has been a contested benchmark since its inception in 2014.

“The Philippines’ involvement with both the US and France demonstrates the need for flexible and adaptable security arrangements in negotiating tricky geopolitical realities and protecting national interest.

As NATO faces an increasingly unpredictable global landscape, coordinated actions to eliminate gaps in defense spending are critical to keeping NATO relevant. Focus, however, should not rest solely on NATO as current geopolitical developments underline the importance of strategic partnerships beyond the transatlantic zone. The Philippines, a major actor in the Asia-Pacific region, is at the center of rising tensions with China over territorial claims in the West Philippine Sea.

With these geopolitical problems, the Philippines has viewed the United States as a critical ally, especially given its role as the world’s top defense spender in 2023 and its historical role in helping win for the Allies against the Axis powers in World War 2. The Philippines and the United States have a long history of military cooperation, which highlights the necessity of strong security alliances in sustaining regional peace and deterrence.

Recognizing the necessity for diverse security measures, Philippine officials have also sought stronger relations with other countries, particularly France. As China’s aggressive moves continue to cause alarm in the area, establishing deeper security relations with France provides a chance for the Philippines to strengthen its defense capabilities and strategic resilience.

Next month, French and Philippine officials will meet in Paris for talks on increasing security cooperation, signaling a proactive attempt to boost bilateral ties in the face of changing security threats. Defense collaboration, maritime security, and cooperative military exercises are among the topics scheduled to be addressed during the discussions.

France, with its strong military capabilities and commitment to international rules, emerges as an important partner for the Philippines in furthering mutual security objectives and ensuring regional stability. With France as the secondbiggest defense spender among NATO countries, the Philippines has chosen well to consider forging with the French a Visiting Forces Agreement similar to what the Philippines has with the US.

In a nutshell, when geopolitical tensions rise in many locations, strategic partnerships and alliances play an important role in creating the security picture and fostering stability.

The Philippines’ involvement with both the United States and France demonstrates the need for flexible and adaptable security arrangements in negotiating tricky geopolitical realities and protecting national interests in a period of increased unpredictability.