NATO vs Russia

[mopardave]

Originally Posted by BANANASBANANAS

That is open to interpretation and the ‘agreement’’ does need tightening up. On the one hand the document does make reference to ‘guideline’ but then goes on about ‘an agreement’ to contribute a minimum of 2% of GDP each year.

Quote:The 2% defence investment guideline

In 2006, NATO Defence Ministers agreed to commit a minimum of 2% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to defence spending to continue to ensure the Alliance's military readiness. This guideline also serves as an indicator of a country's political will to contribute to NATO's common defence efforts since the defence capacity of each member has an impact on the overall perception of the Alliance's credibility as a politico-military organisation.
Unquote:

In which world can it be both an agreement and a guideline?

Similarly, is there a single reason why any NATO country cannot contribute 2% of its GDP? The inference is clear. Some countries want gold standard cover at cut rate premium.

And one country wants gold standard cover F.O.C. whilst continuing to snipe at its nearest neighbour and throwing its weight around in Europe......yes, I know they aren't a full member. Just saying.