 |
| NATO adopted a 2% of GDP Defence Spending Policy - Something Canada is currently not abiding by |
At the core of his criticism of the multilateral alliance is that the United States foots the bill for far too much of the alliance's defence capacity, and other member nations — including Canada — are "freeloaders" for failing to contribute their fair share of domestic military spending.
"It's obsolete and too many people are getting a free ride," Trump said Tuesday night after racking up lopsided victories in five presidential primaries.
"Frankly, they have to put up more money. We are paying disproportionately. It's too much. It's a different world than it was when we originally conceived of the idea."
He has also argued that NATO does not adequately address the pressing problems of our time, notably Islamic terrorism, but is instead focused on an older adversary, Russia, and its continental encroachment.
Related
Canada's patched-up military: Too few dollars, too many missions
Harjit Sajjan names blue-ribbon panel to review Canada's defence policy
Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan says he will not reduce the size of the military
He doubled down Wednesday, during one of his first scripted policy speeches in Washington, saying that if NATO allies don't meet the spending targets they should get out of the alliance and defend themselves against security threats without relying on American firepower.
"The countries we are defending must pay for the cost of this defence, and if not, the U.S. must be prepared to let these countries defend themselves. We have no choice," he said.
Donald Trump slams military 'free riders' in NATO0:48
Defence review to consider spending boost
Canada's Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan said Wednesday that meeting NATO's spending target of two per cent of GDP — something that Canada agreed to in 2006 — is still under consideration.
"This is a discussion we're going to have as part of the defence review," Sajjan said, adding that money alone does not accurately measure Canada's military contributions. "The defence review is also going to allow us to have that conversation about what direction we need to go. We are committed to working with our multilateral organizations, and NATO is a part of that."
Canada signed on to meeting that target but that promise looks disingenuous in retrospect. Canada's spending comes in at just one per cent of GDP, or roughly $20 billion a year, a figure that many argue is simply too low to sustain a fine fighting force. Indeed, only five other countries of the 28 in NATO spend less.
In the short term, Canada is inching no closer to meeting its goal. The 2016 budget deferred some $3.7 billion in spending for capital projects by five years. The Harper government, too, let billions in planned military spending lapse.
The military spending shortfall from non-U.S. NATO allies has left some member countries wholly dependent on the Americans for key military functions, something that could be mitigated by more robust national military budgets.
"There is an over-reliance by the alliance as a whole on the United States for the provision of essential capabilities, including for instance, in regard to intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance; air-to-air refueling; ballistic missile defense; and airborne electronic warfare," NATO officials wrote in a recent policy paper on national funding.
Trump, Obama on the same page
It's not just the decidedly non-interventionist Trump — a man who has had trouble naming any of his foreign policy advisers — who has taken aim at countries that are failing to meet the spending target. In fact, he is on the same page with an unlikely ally: the current president.
"Free riders aggravate me," Obama said in a recent, in-depth interview with The Atlantic magazine.
As recently as last year, the president warned the United Kingdom that it would no longer be able to claim a "special relationship" with the U.S. if it failed to spend at least two per cent of its GDP on defence.
"You have to pay your fair share," Obama told British Prime Minister David Cameron. In last year's budget, Britain subsequently met the target despite an emphasis on austerity in other areas of program spending.
Trump is not the first person to raise the "free rider" statement. U.S. President Barack Obama has said he doesn't like military 'free riders,' something that could include Canada, which lags behind the NATO goal of spending two per cent of GDP on defence.
It's not known if Obama has raised Canada's comparatively low levels of military spending with Prime Minister Trudeau, but the country's defence budget has not gone unnoticed by others in the capital of our closest partner, including liberal-minded Democrats in Congress.
"The prime minister has committed to up the ante for Canada's presence in the world," senior U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar told CBC Radio's The House during a recent visit to Washington, and that should include boosted military spending.
"I know you have your own economic issues with oil prices down and other things ... but I do think that it would be good if Canada would invest a bit more — and I love that two per cent number," the senator said, identifying it as one of the few sticking points between the two countries.
Canada's patched-up military: Too few dollars, too many missions
Harjit Sajjan names blue-ribbon panel to review Canada's defence policy
Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan says he will not reduce the size of the military
He doubled down Wednesday, during one of his first scripted policy speeches in Washington, saying that if NATO allies don't meet the spending targets they should get out of the alliance and defend themselves against security threats without relying on American firepower.
"The countries we are defending must pay for the cost of this defence, and if not, the U.S. must be prepared to let these countries defend themselves. We have no choice," he said.
Donald Trump slams military 'free riders' in NATO0:48
Defence review to consider spending boost
Canada's Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan said Wednesday that meeting NATO's spending target of two per cent of GDP — something that Canada agreed to in 2006 — is still under consideration.
"This is a discussion we're going to have as part of the defence review," Sajjan said, adding that money alone does not accurately measure Canada's military contributions. "The defence review is also going to allow us to have that conversation about what direction we need to go. We are committed to working with our multilateral organizations, and NATO is a part of that."
Canada signed on to meeting that target but that promise looks disingenuous in retrospect. Canada's spending comes in at just one per cent of GDP, or roughly $20 billion a year, a figure that many argue is simply too low to sustain a fine fighting force. Indeed, only five other countries of the 28 in NATO spend less.
In the short term, Canada is inching no closer to meeting its goal. The 2016 budget deferred some $3.7 billion in spending for capital projects by five years. The Harper government, too, let billions in planned military spending lapse.
The military spending shortfall from non-U.S. NATO allies has left some member countries wholly dependent on the Americans for key military functions, something that could be mitigated by more robust national military budgets.
"There is an over-reliance by the alliance as a whole on the United States for the provision of essential capabilities, including for instance, in regard to intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance; air-to-air refueling; ballistic missile defense; and airborne electronic warfare," NATO officials wrote in a recent policy paper on national funding.
Trump, Obama on the same page
It's not just the decidedly non-interventionist Trump — a man who has had trouble naming any of his foreign policy advisers — who has taken aim at countries that are failing to meet the spending target. In fact, he is on the same page with an unlikely ally: the current president.
"Free riders aggravate me," Obama said in a recent, in-depth interview with The Atlantic magazine.
As recently as last year, the president warned the United Kingdom that it would no longer be able to claim a "special relationship" with the U.S. if it failed to spend at least two per cent of its GDP on defence.
"You have to pay your fair share," Obama told British Prime Minister David Cameron. In last year's budget, Britain subsequently met the target despite an emphasis on austerity in other areas of program spending.
Trump is not the first person to raise the "free rider" statement. U.S. President Barack Obama has said he doesn't like military 'free riders,' something that could include Canada, which lags behind the NATO goal of spending two per cent of GDP on defence.
It's not known if Obama has raised Canada's comparatively low levels of military spending with Prime Minister Trudeau, but the country's defence budget has not gone unnoticed by others in the capital of our closest partner, including liberal-minded Democrats in Congress.
"The prime minister has committed to up the ante for Canada's presence in the world," senior U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar told CBC Radio's The House during a recent visit to Washington, and that should include boosted military spending.
"I know you have your own economic issues with oil prices down and other things ... but I do think that it would be good if Canada would invest a bit more — and I love that two per cent number," the senator said, identifying it as one of the few sticking points between the two countries.
----
John Paul (J.P.) Tasker is an associate producer and web writer in the CBC's Parliamentary bureau in Ottawa. Prior to joining the web desk, he was a producer on CBC News Network's Power & Politics. He can be reached at john.tasker@cbc.ca.Follow J.P. on Twitter
No comments:
Post a Comment