Posted on 07/10/2026 3:07:57 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Even people who dislike Donald Trump tend to give him credit for one thing: getting NATO to pay its fair share. American presidents have long grumbled about burden sharing. Trump has been crude, theatrical and transactional, but the sentiment he expressed was broadly shared. And Europeans got the message. Non-American NATO countries collectively spent 1.4 percent of their combined gross domestic product on defense in 2014; in 2025, it was close to 2.3 percent.
But be careful what you wish for.
The usual assumption is that if Europe spends more, the United States will spend less. This is demonstrably wrong. European defense spending is at its highest level in decades, yet Trump has proposed a staggering $1.5 trillion defense budget for fiscal 2027.
U.S. defense spending has never been determined only by the needs of NATO. It reflects America’s role as a global superpower, with bases, fleets and commitments across the world. Washington wants to deter Russia, counter China, project power in the Middle East, protect global sea-lanes, defend the homeland, maintain nuclear superiority, dominate space, lead in drones and artificial intelligence, and preserve the ability to fight far from home. In fact, the International Institute for Strategic Studies calculated in 2018 that direct spending on defense in Europe made up only about 5 percent of America’s total defense spending.
As Europe’s spending increases, the continent will become less dependent on the U.S., and less deferential to it.
For more than 75 years, America’s dominance within NATO has given Washington enormous advantages. The U.S. has more than 30 military bases across Europe, and these have allowed it to project power not just in Europe but in Africa, the Middle East...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
They have???? Name one. Possibly Reagan but I'm not sure even he pushed back on NATO cost sharing.
‘Pay?’ Spain just coughed up what they should have been paying, a couple days ago. So how will the USA ‘Pay’? You commie propagandists (aka liars).
WaPo!!!!!!!
*ROFLMAO*
“Fareed Zakaria”
Ummm OK, Allah snackbar!
Fareed Zakaria.... meh.
To paraphrase Amadeus, “One hears such sounds, and what can one say but... Zakaria!”
Well if Fareed says that it must be true.
But at critical times, they are denying the usage we require. So to hell with them.
NATO cut spending after the collapse of the USSR. Clinton said nothing and cheered the “peace dividend” while he reduced the size of the US military.
“The U.S. will pay for the chain reaction Trump set off in NATO”
Huh? I doubt it.
“U.S. defense spending has never been determined only by the needs of NATO.”
Of course. So what?
There is no connection between the headline and this nonsensical article.
Somewhere about these premises we had a roster of publications we weren’t to post from over their intransigence regarding “Fair Use.”
I’m about finished with WaPo being permitted on this site for reasons of their inability to NOT publish wholesale propaganda as “news.”
WaPo advances NOTHING good.
You wouldn’t let a 10” sewer line get routed into your Living Room; why would you let WaPo CRAP get routed to your brain???
But back then they were at least willing to host World War III ( or One Hundred Eleven if Ilhan Omar is counting).
Where is "somewhere?"
Just standard Washington Post junk.
The essential argument is that (a) as Europe spends more on military defense, (b) the resulting buildup can reach a net change of significant less dependence on the U.S. and (c) at some point that may mean less deference to the U.S. on geopolitical issues.
Blah, blah, blah! 🙄
“You flatter me.”
Exactly!
Washington Compost. Just a rag. Not even fit to put in the bird cage.
Exactly!
Washington Compost. Just a rag. Not even fit to put in the bird cage.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.