NATO’s Five-Percent Target

Weapons and infrastructure

The plan to commit all NATO members to military spending of five percent of their GDP has reportedly been pursued by NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte since his return from talks in Washington, at the end of April. Previously, he had favored an increase of 3.5 percent of the GDP, but failed to convince US President Donald Trump, according to insiders.[1] Rutte only managed to negotiate a compromise, whereby 3.5 percent of the GDP would be spent directly on the armed forces, while 1.5 percent would be used to comprehensively prepare the infrastructure for war. Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof had already reported on the plan last Friday, which has since been confirmed by other sources. The new 5% target is supposed to be achieved in only seven years, by 2032.[2] The specific form of the 1.5 percent share - referred to as a "soft component" - is still a disputed subject; a number of countries want to include their expenditures on cyber security or the upgrading of external borders, for example.[3] It is unclear whether there are still any fundamental objections to the five percent target.

Billions and Trillions

The impending boost in European military spending is enormous. Whereas, European NATO members have already spent US $476 billion on their armed forces in 2024 – or €428 billion at the current rate – they would have to increase their spending to US $805 billion or €725 billion in order to reach 3.5% of their GDP. If the 1.5% of GDP expenditure on the infrastructure for war preparations is added, the total expenditure of 5% of the GDP would come to US $1.150 trillion or €1.035 trillion. Germany would have to boost its military budget (3.5 percent of the GDP) from currently around €52 billion to €150 billion; the total expenditures on war preparations (5 percent of the GDP) would thus amount to €215 billion. If the German economy were to ever grow again, the share for armaments would also increase proportionally with the GDP. As a comparison: the current draft federal budget earmarks just over €22 billion for education and research and €16.5 billion for health. The budget for labor and social affairs, including pensions and social benefits – the largest item in the German national budget to date – is less than 4.2 percent of the GDP.

The Armaments Debt Crisis

It is fully uncertain what consequences this plan to finance an unprecedented arms buildup with debts will have. Even before taking office, the Bundestag had already permitted the new German government to ignore the existing debt ceiling for outlays on the infrastructure – military infrastructure included – up to €500 billion, as well as unlimited outlays for the Bundeswehr. Whereas Germany can still afford skyrocketing debts for its arms buildup, other countries – such as France, Italy and Spain – with their already high debt levels, are fearing a new debt crisis. A comprehensive European economic collapse during an arms buildup debt crisis can no longer be ruled out.

Close to the Theater of Operations

Whereas the NATO nations‘ arms buildup has long been in full swing – particularly in Germany, (german-foreign-policy.com reported [4]) – the military alliance is additionally focusing on expanding its own infrastructure, thus violating the Two-Plus-Four Treaty. This pertains to the system of pipelines NATO uses to provide fuel to its armed forces, particularly kerosene for its aviation. Of these, the Central European Pipeline System (CEPS) is particularly prominent, which supplies military airfields in Germany, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and US military facilities. Since the CEPS storage tanks must be routinely emptied and refilled – kerosene can only be stored for a limited amount of time, due to a decomposition process – civilian airports are also connected to this pipeline system. The CEPS having been constructed during the cold war and not having been extended since, East Germany is not connected. According to an internal memo from the German ministry of Defense, NATO now intends to revise this, to be able, in future, “to store fuel as far to the east, and as close as possible to the potential theater of operations.”[5]

“Break the Resistance”

This is not only expensive. According to the ministry, the pipeline is estimated to cost about a million euros pro-kilometer. Altogether, it is reckoned that the total costs could run to €21 billion, of which Berlin would assume more than €3.5 billion, Defense Minister Pistorius was quoted to have said.[6] Above all, however, the CEPS’ extension onto East German territory violates the decision made during the Two-Plus-Four Treaty not to extend the pipeline system across that border.[7] In the Two-Plus-Four Treaty it is also stipulated that “foreign armed forces” will “neither be stationed in nor transferred to this region of Germany.” According to reports there is talk not only of building a pipeline link through East Germany to Poland, but even of connecting airports such as Berlin-Brandenburg [8] or Leipzig/Halle [9]. How concrete these plans have already advanced can be seen in the fact that the Defense Ministry is, reportedly, “already contemplating” how “the expected resistance can be broken.” “Citizens, but also municipalities, and federal states” could rise up in opposition to these plans – “for example, against the threat of expropriation or because of environmental concerns.”[10] The German government recently answered a parliamentary inquiry from the parliamentarian, Sören Pellmann (The Left Party) alleging that it has “no concrete information” on the expansion of the CEPS.[11]

Breach of Treaty in Rostock

Berlin is already breaching the Two-Plus-Four Treaty with the Commander Task Force Baltic (CTF Baltic), a NATO tactical headquarters based in Rostock. The Defense Ministry claims that the CTF Baltic is ”a national headquarters with multi-national participation.” Although it is “commanded by a German Admiral,” his deputy is a “Polish Admiral,” and a “Swedish Staff Officer,” has been designated as chief of staff.[12] “Subordinate leadership positions are also multinational,” the ministry continues. How this is supposed to be in line with the stipulations that “foreign armed forces” may “neither be stationed in nor transferred“ to the territory of the GDR, is unclear. Still, the German government claims that accusations of the CTF Baltic being in violation of the Two-Plus-Four Treaty do not apply. The German government-financed Deutsche Welle broadcaster is even launching a so-called fact checking campaign against critics.[13] With the currently planned eastward expansion of the NATO pipeline system, the military alliance is expanding even further onto East German territory. The Two-Plus-Four Treaty is of high significance: it replaces the peace treaty never concluded by the Federal Republic of Germany, in order to avoid having to pay reparations. If Germany violates it, other countries could also no longer feel bound by it.

[1] Thomas Gutschker: Die NATO ringt um Ausgaben von fünf Prozent. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 13.05.2025.

[2] Lorne Cook, Mike Corder: Dutch leader says NATO's chief insists allies should spend at least 3.5% of GDP on defense budgets. independent.co.uk 09.05.2025.

[3] Thomas Gutschker: Die NATO ringt um Ausgaben von fünf Prozent. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 13.05.2025.

[4] See Konversion rückwärts, Der Kontinent des Krieges und Die Rüstungsregierung im Amt.

[5], [6] Matthias Gebauer, Christoph Schult: Sprit für die Ostflanke. spiegel.de 21.02.2025.

[7] Jens Koenen, Christoph Schlautmann: Nato-Drehscheibe – Bundeswehr ruft Logistikkonzerne zu Hilfe. handelsblatt.com 22.04.2025.

[8] Matthias Gebauer, Christoph Schult: Sprit für die Ostflanke. spiegel.de 21.02.2025.

[9] Jens Koenen, Christoph Schlautmann: Nato-Drehscheibe – Bundeswehr ruft Logistikkonzerne zu Hilfe. handelsblatt.com 22.04.2025.

[10] Matthias Gebauer, Christoph Schult: Sprit für die Ostflanke. spiegel.de 21.02.2025.

[11] Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Schriftliche Frage 4/291 des Abgeordneten Sören Pellmann vom 29. April 2025. Berlin, 07.05.2025.

[12] Pistorius weiht neues maritimes taktisches Hauptquartier für die NATO ein. bmvg.de 15.10.2024. See also Die Ostsee-Wache.

[13] Rayna Breuer, Tetyana Klug: Faktencheck: Verstößt NATO-Präsenz gegen 2+4-Vertrag? dw.com 16.10.2024.