According to Bijkerk, the two percent standard has always been useful in making it clear to countries like the Netherlands that more money should be spent on defense. “But what you see now is that instead of being a means, it has become an end in itself,” says Bijkerk. “Almost a kind of mantra.”
“The two percent standard has become an end in itself, rather than a means”
He claims that the Dutch Ministry of Defense suddenly buys all kinds of equipment and makes investments, while the question of why such items are being bought is not asked. “What are the plans for our military,” she continues. “This is much more essential than always reaching two percent.”
Political percentage
Bijkerk therefore thinks that the NATO standard is primarily political. He therefore calls the mandatory two percent a “political percentage.” “I think we really should spend more on defense, because we’ve neglected it since Rutte I’s cabinet,” says Bijkerk. “But the amount depends on what exactly we want to do with the defense.”
He is supported by Assistant Professor of International Security Cooperation Sabine Mengelberg of the Netherlands Defense Academy. He believes that the term “standard” is also incorrect for the NATO contribution. “It’s more of a statement of solidarity within NATO,” she says. “Before Russia invaded Ukraine, we were at the bottom of the list when it came to defense spending, and that’s definitely not a good thing.”
No legal basis
According to Mengelberg, one must also realize that two percent is not legally stipulated anywhere in the NATO treaty. “I think it’s a great thing that Rein has drawn attention to it in the NRC,” he continues. “But we must bear in mind that it is pure solidarity with others. A percentage doesn’t really say much.’