La NATO per costringere il Regno Unito a sollevare la spesa per la difesa al 3,5% del PIL per placare Trump, affermano le fonti
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jun/03/nato-defence-spending-uk-trump
di 00DEADBEEF
La NATO per costringere il Regno Unito a sollevare la spesa per la difesa al 3,5% del PIL per placare Trump, affermano le fonti
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jun/03/nato-defence-spending-uk-trump
di 00DEADBEEF
14 commenti
Good, makes the SDR and the announcements very much affordable.
It is now the very unfavourable position of Reeves to finance it, but on the bright side, at least we’re aren’t the French right now because they are up shit creek without a paddle.
As much as I loath Trump, and by loath I mean hate every ounce of his being, this wouldn’t be a bad thing all things considered.
UK and more importantly and the rest of Europe need to be there already. Tbh it’s a helpful kick up the arse – rather now from US than later from Russian bombs
Good. We should have been doing it anyway. Don’t know where money will come from though.
So pennies with the GDP per capita crashing beyond recognition
This is really disappointing if true. I’m very much in favour of more defence spending but if we knew about this in advance why didn’t Starmer just commit to spending 3.5% now and lead the way instead of waiting to be dragged up to a target by the US.
We’re not going to be forced to do anything. The NATO target is 2% now, has been for decades and Spain, Canada, Italy just don’t do it, nowhere near.
The target might get lifted to 3.5% but the only mechanism NATO has to enforce that is raised eyebrows and tutting.
Unfortunately for the UK, our leaders are the only ones who care about being tutted at.
Defence sources believe that Britain will be forced to sign up to a target of lifting defence spending to 3.5% of GDP by 2035 at this month’s [Nato](https://www.theguardian.com/world/nato) summit after a campaign by the alliance’s secretary general to keep [Donald Trump](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donaldtrump) onboard.
we are currently at 2.3 rising to 2.5, then 3 by 2030 so we on track anyway.
Nato to ‘force’…what?
If they had any power – which they don’t – maybe they’d start with Canada and Spain’s ‘military’
>One senior insider said Britain would “without a doubt” sign up to a proposal from the Nato chief, Mark Rutte
Now that’s a little bit different to the headline.
Why bother when NATO will support its members? We have bigger spending priorities than this.
With the global situation, it makes sense, but for shit sake, do NOT say it’s to appease trump! He’ll count it as a win and class is as vindication for everything he has said and done this time round!
Since it is the wealthy who benefit most from security and a financialised globalised market economy. I hope they are ready to pay a far larger contribution to the treasury. Especially from their financialised wealth, which has a gini coefficient of 0.87 in the U.K.
[https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10210/](https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10210/)
1 in the gini coefficient is maximal inequality.
I wonder where they will get the money for it. What do you think?
Option A: Tax retired people who are hoarding huge amounts of property wealth and have been shielded from most of the economic hardship we have faced.
Option B: Tax corporations who are bleeding us dry and hoarding the profits. Especially American tech firms who have been raw-dogging the world for years.
Option C: Tax the ever living fuck out of middle and low wage, working age people as always, plunging them into ever more poverty. All the whole cutting any kind of benefit, healthcare, or support that could make life bearable.
We all know the answer.