Latest news with #defensespending
Arab News
14 hours ago
- Business
- Arab News
Italy, pressed to lower deficit but hike defense spending, lashes at ‘stupid' EU rules
ROME: European Union budget rules are 'stupid and senseless' and need to be changed to allow member states to boost defense spending as recommended by Brussels, Italian Economy Minister Giancarlo Giorgetti said on Thursday. The EU Commission has introduced flexibility clauses to allow more investment in security, but Giorgetti said their current form penalizes countries such as Italy, which are under a so-called EU infringement procedure for their excessive deficits. 'It is essential to find ways to bring these rules up to date with the crisis we are experiencing so that they do not seem stupid and senseless,' the minister said in a statement issued by his staff on the sidelines of a meeting with euro zone peers in Luxembourg. The title of the statement was blunter, saying Giorgetti called for changes to 'stupid and senseless rules.' Brussels has proposed allowing member states to raise defense spending by 1.5 percent of gross domestic product each year for four years without any disciplinary steps that would normally kick in once a deficit is more than 3 percent of GDP. The plan came amid growing pressure in Europe to boost military spending to deter a potential attack from Russia and become less dependent on the United States. Highly-indebted Italy is set this year to meet the NATO defense target of 2 percent of GDP through a series of accounting changes, but an alliance summit next week is expected to raise the goal to 5 percent of GDP. Giorgetti said that, under the Commission's scheme, member states not subject to the EU's excessive deficit procedure would be allowed to use the extra leeway on defense without breaching budget rules, even if their deficits rise above the 3 percent of GDP ceiling. However, 'member states already in the infringement procedure cannot use the same flexibility,' he added. In this situation Italy is reluctant to use the EU flexibility clause because it would prevent it from lowering its deficit to 2.8 percent of GDP in 2026 from 3.4 percent last year, as planned. 'Italy is committed to a timely exit from the infringement procedure and accepting the invitation to increase defense spending would forever prevent this,' Giorgetti said. Rome is also wary of any move that could harm its improving reputation on financial markets, two government officials said. Last month, credit ratings agency Moody's upgraded Italy's outlook to 'positive' after rival S&P Global raised the country's rating to 'BBB+' from 'BBB.' Italy's preferred option would be the issuance of common EU debt to finance higher defense spending, one of the officials said, but such a plan would require support from the other bloc members. (Editing by Alvise Armellini and Gavin Jones)
Bloomberg
a day ago
- Business
- Bloomberg
Spain Opposes Rutte's Plan to Raise NATO Spending Target to 5%
Spain will oppose NATO plans to raise the target for members' defense spending to 5%, according to a government official. The Spanish government is preparing its formal response to NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte's proposal and sees no reason to increase the target beyond the current 2% of GDP, the official said.
Bloomberg
4 days ago
- Business
- Bloomberg
Luxembourg PM Backs Calls for Joint EU Debt for Defense, Climate
Luxembourg Prime Minister Luc Frieden threw his weight behind calls for the European Union to issue joint debt to fund defense spending and measures to tackle climate change. Common borrowing by the EU's 27 members remains a controversial topic, with nations including Germany broadly opposed, but Frieden said he's in favor if the cash raised is used to fund the massive military buildup underway on the continent, as well as the green transition.
Fast Company
4 days ago
- Business
- Fast Company
Why ‘PeaceTech' must be the next frontier of innovation and investment
Across the globe, we are witnessing a historic surge in defense spending. In the United States, the 2025 defense budget climbed to over $895 billion —one of the largest increases in peacetime history. Europe is following suit. NATO countries, long reluctant to meet their 2% GDP defense target, are not only catching up—some are even surpassing it. China's defense budget, too, has grown steadily, now exceeding $240 billion. The logic is simple but sobering: the world feels less secure, and the response has been to arm—faster and broader than at any time since the Cold War. Some of this acceleration is driven by real and growing threats— Russia's aggression, instability in the Middle East, and rising tensions in the Indo-Pacific. But much of it reflects a self-reinforcing spiral: nations are investing in weapons because others are. In this climate of fear, alliances are being redefined. The transatlantic relationship, once centered on cooperative security, is now being recalibrated around hard power and deterrence. What is peacetech? This shift has also reshaped the technology landscape. Private and public investment is pouring into so-called ' dual-use technologies '—AI, data infrastructure, robotics, cyber tools, space assets—that can serve both civilian and military purposes. Palantir, Anduril, Helsing, and others are becoming the darlings of venture capital and defense procurement alike. And yet, amidst this frenzy, a crucial question is being left unasked: Can technology also be used not just to win wars, but to prevent them and save people's lives? There is an emerging field that dares to pose this question— PeaceTech. It is the use of technology to save human lives, prevent conflict, de-escalate violence, rebuild fractured communities, and secure fragile peace in post-conflict environments. From early warning systems that predict outbreaks of violence, to platforms ensuring aid transparency, to mobile tools connecting refugees to services: PeaceTech is real, it works—and it is radically underfunded. Unlike the vast sums pouring into defense startups, peace building efforts, including PeaceTech organizations and ventures, struggle for scraps. The United Nations Secretary General released in 2020 its ambitious goal to fundraise $1.5 billion in peacebuilding support over a total of seven years. In contrast, private investment in defense tech crossed $34 billion in 2023 alone. Why is PeaceTech so neglected? One reason is cultural: in the tech world, 'peace' can seem abstract or idealistic—soft power in a world of hard tech. In reality, peace is not soft; it is among the hardest, most complex challenges of our time. Peace requires systemic thinking, early intervention, global coordination, and a massive infrastructure of care, trust, and monitoring. Maintaining peace in a hyper-polarized, technologically complex world is a feat of engineering, diplomacy, and foresight. And it's a business opportunity. According to the Institute for Economics and Peace, violence costs the global economy over $17 trillion per year —about 13% of global GDP. Even modest improvements in peace would unlock billions in economic value. Consider the peace dividend from predictive analytics that can help governments or international organizations intervene or mediate before conflict breaks out, or AI-powered verification tools to enforce ceasefires and disinformation controls. PeaceTech, if scaled, could become a multi-billion dollar market —and a critical piece of the security architecture of the future. From dual-use to triple-use So what's the path forward? We need to expand the current ' dual-use ' framing of technology—civilian and military—to a ' triple-use ' paradigm that includes peace as a third pillar. This would mean structuring investments in a way that not only supports battlefield advantage and economic competitiveness, but also actively contributes to conflict prevention, mediation and resolution. Venture capital firms, for instance, could allocate 5–10% of their dual-use investment portfolios to PeaceTech driven ventures. Governments, too, could dedicate slices of their expanded defense budgets to peace building innovation funds. Security alliances like NATO could adopt PeaceTech as part of their doctrine—developing and deploying technologies that de-escalate tensions supported by real solutions rather than just deter or defeat enemies. This is not naïve idealism. It is a pragmatic innovation. During the COVID-19 pandemic, we saw how governments and technologists could come together to build contact tracing apps, accelerate vaccine development, and respond to a global crisis in real time. Why should we not mobilize with the same urgency and ambition to respond to the epidemic of conflict and instability? What is innovation for? Technology is not truly neutral—it is a tool and reflects the priorities of those who fund and deploy it. Right now, our investments signal a belief that conflict is inevitable and peace is accidental. We can and must reverse that logic. In the age of AI and digital dominance, 'Pax Technica' is emerging—not as utopia, but as a strategy: peace through technological strength. PeaceTech and defense must work hand in hand to develop the most effective technologies—not just to prevent conflict, but to build stability and save lives. Without speed, seamless integration, and real-time adaptability, even the most advanced PeaceTech and defense systems will fail in critical missions. The future depends on the rapid mobilization of technological innovation—to respond to threats, protect civilians, and secure peace before violence erupts. We are already building the tools that will shape the future of security. The question is whether we'll use them only to wage war—or also to build peace and save millions people's lives.
Washington Post
7 days ago
- Business
- Washington Post
Sweden and the Netherlands say before NATO summit they will spend 5% of GDP on defense
BRUSSELS — Less than two weeks before a NATO summit, Sweden and the Netherlands said Friday that they intend to increase defense spending to 5% of their gross domestic product, in line with U.S. President Donald Trump's demands. Trump and his NATO counterparts meet for a summit in the Netherlands on June 24-25, where they're due to agree a new defense spending target . He insists that Europe must look after its own security, while Washington focuses on China and its own borders. Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said that 'Sweden will reach a new NATO spending target to 5% of GDP, where at least 3.5% of GDP will be allocated towards core defense requirements to fulfill NATO's new capability targets.' 'We are in a specific geographical situation where we need to meet the future threats from Russia,' Kristersson told reporters in Stockholm, standing alongside NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte. After Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022, NATO's 32 allies agreed to spend at least 2% of GDP on their military budgets. But NATO's new plans for defending Europe and North America against a Russian attack require investment of at least 3%. The aim now is to raise the bar to 3.5% for core defense spending on tanks, warplanes, air defense, missiles and hiring extra troops. A further 1.5% would be spent on things like roads, bridges, ports and airfields so armies can deploy more quickly, as well as preparing societies for possible attack. According to the most recent NATO figures, Sweden was estimated to have spent 2.25% of its GDP on defense last year. The Netherlands spent 2.06%, among 22 of the 32 allies who reached NATO's old benchmark. The Dutch caretaker government announced on Friday that it would increase spending on defense to 3.5% of GDP in an effort to meet the 5% goal. It's not clear where the approximately 18 billion euros ($20 billion) will come from. Dutch Defense Minister Ruben Brekelmans called the decision 'historic' and told reporters after a Cabinet meeting that he hoped other NATO countries would also increase their spending. 'My expectation is that this will happen,' he said. Poland and the Baltic countries — Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania — have already publicly committed to 5%, and Rutte said last week that most allies were ready to endorse the goal. A big question still to be answered is what time frame countries will get to reach the new spending goals. A target date of 2032 was initially floated, but Rutte has said that Russia could be ready to launch an attack on NATO territory by 2030. The United States insists that a near-term deadline must be set. But Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani said on Thursday that his country would get to 5%,. but would require a decade to do so. ___ Molly Quell reported from The Hague, Netherlands.
