A strategic challenge for Belgium

When the sage shows the moonthe idiot looks at the finger, says the proverb. However, And in the current debate on defense expenses. Moreover, aren’t we a little too focused on the finger-these astronomical figures that turn the heads? Nevertheless, At first glance, NATO’s objective – forcing its members to spend 5% of GDP each year, 3.5% of which is for military spending and 1.5% for cybersecurity, infrastructure and anti -terrorism – seems excessive. Furthermore, If Europeans with the British have their defense budget in the broad sense at 5% of GDP. Furthermore, that is more than 1,000 billion per year, or expenses that exceed those in the United States (900 billion dollars, or only 3.4% of their GDP), eclipse China (250-300 billion) and crush Russia (120 billion currently).

For a country like Belgiumthis would represent a security-defense budget of more than 30 billion strategic challenge belgium per year. For example, It is virtually untenable for us, but also for others like Italy, Spain, France. Therefore, Even the United States, often presented as the model to follow, spend “only” 3.4% of their GDP in defense, and again, part of this budget will be reallocated to priorities such as border control. These thunderous announcements of NATO therefore evoke rather the Maori warrior hakas. with a part of swarming intended as much to impress Russia or China as to galvanize the allies.

The debate, however, is not just accountantit is also strategic. In a world where cyber attacks paralyze hospitals, administrations or electrical networks, invest 1.5% of GDP in cybersecurity and critical infrastructure is not extravagant. This is a support-life for digital companies, an investment which, incidentally, could make our tax administrations less strategic challenge belgium prone to bugs. It is on the pure military component – 3.5% of GDP – that the rub. For Belgium, going from 1.3 to 3.5% is equivalent to spending 13 billion more each year. How to convince taxpayers, already strongly requested (euphemism), that this effort is necessary?

The answer lies in an economic vision. And therefore in intelligent public investments, having in mind, at all times, the benefits in terms of activity and employment. We have in Belgium. and more particularly in Wallonia, an aeronautical, spatial and defense industry that brings together companies with very high added value. These industries are not content to produce weapons. They attract investments, create technological ecosystems and lay the foundations for tomorrow’s innovations. The history of DARPA. the American agency for innovation and defense, is instructive: its investments have given birth to the Internet, GPS and medical advances that benefit the civil economy.

strategic challenge belgium

It will not be easy or painless. Economic repercussions will not be immediate, and taxpayers may shout at tax hysteria in the face of expenses that will only bear fruit. However. rather than appearing amazed as today, governments should show pedagogy to explain that these investments are not only a response to geopolitical threats, but a lever to build a more resilient economy. Because the alternative-subcontract our security in the USA or. worse, finding itself helpless in the face of powers like China or Russia-would be much more expensive. In a world where international law is only a memory. where the United States and China play their technological and military muscles and where, in Moscow, we dream of rebuilding the Soviet Empire, strategic dependence would cost us a fortune.