Concretely? This represents around 25 billion euros to be unlocked each year. A colossal amount that already makes teeth cringe within the Arizona coalition. Saturday and Sunday, the presidents Conner Rousseau (Vooruit), Georges-Louis Bouchez (MR) and Sammy Mahdi (CD & V) united their voices to criticize this “military flight”.
However, Prime Minister Bart de Wever will not have a choice Tuesday and Wednesday: it is impossible to oppose an NATO consensus decision.
Social security should not be unraveled for me, or even health. You have to look for money on the side of the regions.
The impossible equation of the federal
The war in Ukraine changed the situation. Europe must rearm, and quickly. But how does our country, accustomed for decades to cut on its military budget, find these billions? Will we have to sacrifice social security, increase taxes or go into debt more?
5 % for the defense. Do we measure the size of the effort?
Some already criticize the Minister of Defense for wanting “unravel social security ” To finance the army. A reproach that the defense economist Wally Struys (ERM) swells: “It is a false dilemma. The problem is not there. “
For Struys, the solution lies elsewhere: “When the regions are asked to participate, they say that it is federal. But for six weeks, both the Flemings and the Walloons say they can participate. Since they are defended by the Belgian defense and they agree to make efforts somewhere, they can do more than that. “
The economist points to a crying structural imbalance : “We must not unravel social security for me, nor even health. You have to look for money on the side of the regions. The problem is that the federalness, after having financed the regions by tax revenue, keeps only 8 % of these tax revenues for its expenses”, he explains. A proportion deemed “insufficient” to ensure the sovereign missions: police, justice and defense. The figures speak for themselves, according to the expert: out of the 120 billion euros in the federal state, “the regions receive 40 %, Social Security 50 %, and the sovereign functions only 10 %in terms of tax revenue.”
The 5% threshold of GDP in the defense should not apply to the USA, says Trump
Belgian challenges: between catch -up and specificities
And as a reminder, the current standard of 2 % of GDP, “subscribed in 2014 to Wales, notably by Belgium”, recalls Struys, was already in discussions “since 2003”. But “we talked very quickly about 3.5 % since 2022” with the intensification of the Russian threat.
Contrary to popular belief, “the 5 % was put forward by Trump, but also by the Baltic countries, Finland and Poland which are on the front line,” said the economist. These countries, directly exposed, push for a massive reset of Europe.
First challenge: reach the current 2 %. “We will not be at 2 % this year, we will be 1.8 % with the decisions taken,” admits an internal source in La Défense. On July 2, the Security and Defense Council will have to decide, but “the proposed measures will make it possible to get there in 2026, without anything structural after.”
Our source warns: “We cannot sell family jewelry like Belfius every 30 years.” For the 3.5 %, it will be necessary “more structural measures belonging strictly to the defense expenses of NATO.”
NATO summit in The Hague – the objective of 5% of GDP dedicated to defense deemed “unreasonable” by Spain
The objective is realistic but it is not about to materialize tomorrow. “Even the United States is not there, Poland has just exceeded 4 %, some Baltic countries are approaching.” The objective of 5 % (3.5 % + 1.5 %) will be the subject of “NATO discussions this week”, with a horizon of “7 or 10 years” for its implementation.
Weak points and shooting window
As for the international context, it must be said that since the annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the situation has changed. More worrying: “half of the new Russian units are heading north, that is to say the Baltic countries and Finland.”
Eastern Europe is therefore “directly threatened”. Moldova could be “the next potential victim,” anticipates Wally Struys.
If “on the hybrid level, Russia can attack”, militarily “not yet: it takes between 5 and 8 years to reconstruct an offensive army.” But NATO has “weaknesses”, especially “between Lithuania and Poland: a 60km hole between Kaliningrad and Belarus. If the Russians attacked this gaps despite the presence of NATO troops, we could not oppose it. And resume the lost ground is “Much more difficult than taking it”warns Struys.
The Netherlands ready to bring their defense expenses to 5% of their GDP
Faced with skeptics on Belgian capacity, Struys recalls: “Belgium is the 5th richest country in Europe. Romania, 22nd in wealth in the EU, has already reached 2.25 % last year and targets 3 %. If a poor country like Romania arrives there, why not?”
“It is a political decision that counts, but the capacities, we have them “, he insists. The problem ? “Between 1983 and 2019, the defending power was lost to the defense power continuously despite the threats.” Result: “It took a war to understand.”
Moreover, in 1953, Belgian defense expenses represented 4.86 % of GDP. Today, to reach 5 %, “it would take 6 or 7 years”, especially since defense companies “Work in block but are limited because we have divest there too.“
