Heads of state from NATO member countries are gathered in The Hague from June 24 to 25 for a summit expected to substantially increase Europe’s military budgets.
Influenced by pressure from the US administration and anti-Russia discourse endorsed by EU officials, NATO and government officials have all but agreed to raise defense spending to 3.5% of GDP for military purposes and up to 5% when including infrastructure and technology investments.
In what can easily be interpreted as an effort to increase pressure on other attendees, US President Donald Trump posted a list of NATO members and their respective contributions on right-wing social media, complaining that billions of euros spent on the alliance are still insufficient.
Few countries have (slightly) pushed back against the armament agenda. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez called the proposed targets “counterproductive” and contrary to his administration’s welfare goals. Belgian and Slovak authorities expressed similar reservations, but early remarks from NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte suggested little understanding for different opinions during the summit.
Ahead of the summit, Rutte said the budget hike would be “decisive” for the “deterrence” of Russia. He reiterated the alleged benefits, including a boost to related industries and job creation, and urged NATO members to strengthen ties with the defense and other related sectors. “By investing more and producing more, we build a stronger NATO,” he stated.
NATO’s Secretary General, Mark Rutte, and all of the heads of state from the 32 NATO member countries are expected to attend, including US President Donald Trump, French President Emmanuel Macron, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Netherlands Prime Minister Dick Schoof, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and representatives from the European Commission. Representatives from NATO allies in Asia are expected to attend as well.
Resistance to war agenda grows ahead of NATO summit
Outside the summit, however, the atmosphere remains starkly different. Activists and left politicians warn that the proposed spending increase would bring no benefits to Europe. Instead, they argue, it will deepen the region’s reliance on US arms manufacturers and divert resources away from urgently needed social investments.
In the days leading up to June 24, tens of thousands of people across Europe took to the streets demanding greater investment in labor rights, healthcare, and education rather than war. On June 22, peace campaigners from the Netherlands and beyond demonstrated in The Hague, as news of President Trump’s bombing of Iranian nuclear sites reverberated across the region.
Protesters condemned the illegal attack and demanded action against the ongoing genocide in Gaza. “The US had no justification for attacking Iran,” activists from the Collettivo Autoorganizzato Universitario (CAU) told Peoples Dispatch. “We believe it’s another way to support Israel’s genocidal and colonial agenda.”
Read more: Italian workers strike against war and militarization
Demonstrations were also held in other countries. In Italy, a general strike organized by grassroots unions on Friday, June 20, urged Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s government to focus on long-standing workers’ demands rather than increasing military spending. The following day, more than 30,000 people marched in Rome at a national protest organized by the Disarmiamoli! (Let’s Disarm Them!) network, echoing the same message and demonstrating broad public opposition to the armament agenda.
Alongside street protests, alternative peace summits took place in The Hague and Brussels, and support for the anti-war camp was articulated by participants of the Fascism Back in Europe? conference in Berlin. Both the conferences and mobilizations reinforced calls for a European agenda rooted in cooperation, not confrontation, and affirmed that a different path than the one laid out by NATO is urgently needed.
