The Spine In The Spain Of Sánchez (2)
The article argues that NATO members should be allowed to contribute to defense in ways that reflect their own national interests rather than adhering to a rigid, uniform standard. It suggests that true strategic autonomy for Europe requires the maturity to disagree with allies while remaining committed to the alliance.
Why it matters
It addresses the ongoing tension between NATO's collective security requirements and the desire for individual European nations to maintain independent foreign policy.
Insisting that every ally allocate identical proportions of national wealth to defence, irrespective of domestic circumstances or economic priorities, risks conflating coordination with conformity. NATO is strongest when its members contribute meaningfully. However, meaningful contributions need not always be identical.
Spain’s caution therefore warrants analysis rather than caricature. This is not only about budgets. It is about who decides them. The broader question concerns Europe’s long-discussed strategic autonomy. The phrase has become fashionable in Brussels, yet remains deeply controversial in Washington. Many misunderstand what it actually means. Strategic autonomy is not isolation. It is not anti-Americanism, nor is it neutrality. Rather, it is the capacity to make independent decisions while remaining a committed ally. Adults do not cease being friends because they stop asking permission. Nations should aspire to similar maturity.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in