towerAccording to the last budget tables, we will not succeed this year. We should be around 1.9 %”
According to Wally Struys, professor emeritus at the Royal Military School and economist specializing in defense, this promise seems premature. “”According to the last budget tables, we will not succeed this year. We should be around 1.9 %”, he believes. And even for 2026, the objective remains uncertain without structural budgetary changes.
Italy is going to devote 2% of its GDP to La Défense in 2025, as required NATO
“In 2014, after the annexation of Crimea, we set the target of 2 %at ten years, for 2024. We can do it barely, and the context today is much more dangerous”underlines the economist.
A budget puzzle
Definitive budget tables are not yet published, but arbitrations are already under debate. The government has planned to officially pregnant 2 % at the NATO summit on June 24 and 25.
A source close to the file, however, prefers to temper expectations: “There are several proposals on the table, for example on the side of Belfius, but all this would allow at most to reach half the way. The other half, in particular via a possible European loan, remains to be made up.“
towerWe refuse to pass the invoice to future generations “
A part of this budgetary game also consists in integrating certain expenses into defense budgets, such as those linked to the European space agency. “But it takes an agreement at NATO level to determine what is really eligible as a military expenditure. This is not a decision that can be made unilaterally by Belgium“, avertit Wallys Struys.
Federal budget – The vagueness remains on how investments in defense will be funded
In his eyes, this 2 % threshold could only be a step: “Facade countries are already 3 or 3.5 % of GDP. It would not be surprising that NATO soon asks its members to go around 3.5 %or more, by the end of the decade.“
Last week, the pressure was indeed mounted again with a notch. NATO secretary general, Mark Rutte, proposed to bring the Defense Expenditure for Member States to 5 % of GDP, against 2 % currently. A proposal that could in -depth redraw European military commitments.
Future political arbitrations
Asked about this 2 %objective, the firm of the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Budget, Vincent Van Peteghem, recognizes the complexity of the exercise. According to him, the government remains determined to “compensate for additional expenses as much as possible during this legislature, to avoid digging the national debt more.”
Theo Francken presents the main lines of his mandate in La Défense: “If Belgium must prepare for the war? Yes, absolutely”
He recalls that it is certainly possible to temporarily place certain expenses “outside the budget” in the eyes of the European Union, but that does not erase them: “They are still added to debt, and we refuse to pass the bill to future generations.”
The Minister also insists on a point often relegated to the background: the very meaning of these 2 %. “It is not just a percentage matter: above all you have to know what we are going to do in concrete terms. The objective is to use this additional budget in a responsible and coherent manner, to durably rebuild our defense.”
The federal government “undermines the morale of the troops”
Still modest efforts compared to our neighbors
Whatever happens, time is running out for Belgium. Despite the announcements, our country remains lagging behind. “Even by including Arizona’s efforts, Belgium is not among the good NATO students. The others are increasing faster, so the gap is widening.” Result: our classification relating to military spending could still deteriorate.
“We are insulted all the time”: Bart de Wever annoyed by the requirements of the United States about military spending
For comparison, between 2021 and 2024, the country having increased its military spending the most is Luxembourg, with an increase of 174 %. “”Belgium is between 10 and 15 % over the same period “, indicates the expert.
In the short term, the montages envisaged therefore make it possible to change, but not to hold over time. “The proposed solutions are of the short term. There is a lack of structural vision. It will not only be up to this government to respond to them, but the following also because NATO will raise its requirements and we must remain a reliable partner.”
To find the necessary resources, Wally Struys is clear: “We will have to get money where it is, and it is on the side of the communities and regions that we find most of the public means. But it is also there that we observe the most waste, when we read the budget tables.”
