@ISIDEWITHQuestionsForeign policyStarted 8yrs agoActive 2mos ago

Should our country defend other NATO countries that maintain low military defense budgets relative to their GDP?

Should the U.K. defend other NATO countries that maintain low military defense budgets relative to their GDP?

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is an intergovernmental military alliance formed by 28 countries in 1949 after the Second World War. To join NATO each member country pledged to spend at least 2% of their GDP on military spending and defense and defend each other against threats from any non-member country. In a July 2016 interview with the New York Times Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump suggested that the United States would not defend NATO member countries who had failed to increase their military budgets to above 2% of Gross Domestic Product. The suggestion defie…  

Read more
+
Expand
+ Settings x  Left

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 97.9k Left voters.

79%
Yes
21%
No
56%
Yes
15%
No
23%
Yes, and refusing to defend other NATO countries sets a dangerous precedent for the balance of global power
3%
No, we should not defend any NATO country that spends less than 2% of their GDP on military defense
3%
No, and we should withdraw from NATO

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 97.9k Left voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 97.9k Left voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from Left voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @9VRG59Gfrom New York  answered…2mos2MO

Yes, but the UK (and the US) should use levers of power to ensure that no country is able to be a free-rider of collective security guarantees.

 @9VM4JQ3answered…2mos2MO

I think any country that refuses to pay its fair share should be aided in finding a way to increase the spending - however if they refuse to do so still and then go to war I don’t see why anyone else should have to fight for them

 @9RNR9ZZanswered…4mos4MO

No, and send an ultimatum to NATO countries that spend less than 2.5% of their GPD on military defense stating that unless they increase their spending, they will be expelled from NATO within 3-5 years.

 @9R5RJLRanswered…4mos4MO

NATO membership should be contingent on the same percentage spending - therefore all should support each other ’

 @9QC2V78answered…5mos5MO

NO. Like most NATO is old and out of date for the modern world. Time for a newer World Treaty Organization!

 @9Q98P7Janswered…5mos5MO

Yes, but at the same time, encourage that Country to up it's share to 2% of their GDP otherwise funding will be pulled.

 @9Q953CSanswered…5mos5MO

You cannot mandate arbiterially the amount a country should spend as their are economics of scale. However, countries should layout what they can afford and how much they will spend to protect themselves and others if they are part of a security pact, and this should be conditional to membership - if they fail to meet a stated obligation, then they are on their own should another country engage militarily with them.

 @9Q7MSVHanswered…5mos5MO

Maintain defence but raise their requirements over time to a minimum standard when financial capable

Latest News

Stay up-to-date on the most recent “NATO” news articles, updated frequently.

 @HarmoniousPonie from Indiana submitted…4 days4D

Russia’s Silent War: Baltic Cable Attacks Heighten Tensions in Europe

Russia is suspected of orchestrating another major act of sabotage in Europe after two key fiber-optic data cables running below the Baltic Sea were cut off in quick succession earlier this week, government officials said.A 135-mile internet link connecting Sweden’s Gotland Island and Lithuania stopped working on Sunday morning, and a similar 700-mile-long cable linking Finland and Germany ceased to operate the following night, according to government officials and telecom operators.Swedish police started a preliminary sabotage investigation on Tuesday with assistance from the coast guard and the armed forces, the country’s police authority said.Western officials said there are indications that Russia was behind the incidents, which they said were similar to other operations resulting from Moscow’s escalating hybrid warfare against NATO countries in Europe.“Nobody believes that these cables were accidentally cut off,” German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius told reporters. “Therefore we must conclude—without yet knowing specifically who was behind it—that this is a hybrid operation.”His statement was echoed by Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen and her German counterpart, Annalena Baerbock. “Our European security is not only threatened by Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine but also by the hybrid warfare of malicious actors,” the two ministers said in a statement. They stopped short of pointing the finger at Moscow, but officials from both countries said Russia was the prime suspect, without revealing any evidence for this suspicion.The preliminary investigation involving Sweden, Finland, Lithuania, Germany and other nations found that the cables were likely cut in Swedish economic waters, where the two cables intersect in a relatively small area, according to two people familiar with the findings.The damage was near-certain to be a result of human interference rather than caused by any natural phenomena, these people said.Since the launch of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the Kremlin has been accused by Western officials of waging a shadow war on European soil. They allege Russia was behind a plot to place incendiary devices on airplanes, instigated arson attacks in the U.K. and the Czech Republic, and ordered sabotage operations on military and industrial installations in Germany.

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.