Leaders from NATO countries, including US President Donald Trump and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, are currently holding high-level talks aimed at increasing military investment across the alliance even as a significant number of member nations still fall short of the current 2% GDP goal.

A new proposal introduced at the summit urges allies to boost defence spending to 5% of their national output, covering both military readiness and broader security measures. The suggested increase marks a major shift in NATO’s posture, driven by escalating global tensions, particularly with Russia.

However, recent figures reveal that nine countries are yet to hit the 2% benchmark, with Spain at the bottom of the list spending just 1.2% of its GDP in 2024.

President Trump, who has long criticized allies he sees as not pulling their weight, called out Spain for its poor contribution. He previously stated that nations falling short might not be defended and has said he would “encourage” rivals to take liberties with such countries.

The issue reflects more than just economics, it also reveals strategic divides across NATO’s geography. According to defence specialists, countries located closer to Russia, especially in the northern and eastern parts of the alliance, have increased their defence budgets more aggressively than their southern counterparts.

“The allies who feel the most immediate threat from Russia are those investing more,” Ellehuus stated.

Despite mounting pressure, the 2% goal remains a voluntary target, not a legal requirement. Yet political influence, especially from the United States, has often compelled nations to act. A former NATO official observed, “Nobody wants to be called a bad ally.”

Between 2014 and 2024, all NATO members have grown their military budgets. Today, the average spending across non-U.S. member states has reached the 2% mark—up from 1.4% ten years ago.

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has pledged that his country will meet the 2% goal by 2025 and may even reach 2.1% before the end of this year. Still, he pushed back on the proposed 5% goal, calling it “incompatible with our worldview” and stating that Spain has secured an opt-out. Officials from Spain emphasized that buying the right equipment efficiently matters more than simply increasing the numbers.

“We didn’t see the need for large armed forces, instead focusing on disaster response,” explained Mario Saavedra, diplomatic correspondent for El Periódico. “But things are changing very fast.”

A number of other countries have committed to reaching the 2% threshold soon:

Canada, currently at 1.5%, aims to meet the requirement by March 2025.

Belgium is injecting an extra €4 billion this year to raise its share from 1.3% to 2%.

Portugal now plans to hit the mark four years earlier than initially projected.

Italy, which was at 1.5% last year, expects to reach 2% this year.

President Trump has often taken credit for pushing NATO allies to invest more in defence. NATO’s Secretary-General Mark Rutte acknowledged Trump’s impact—something Trump reposted on his Truth Social account, writing, “Europe is going to pay in a BIG way, as they should, and it will be your win.”

When it comes to raw spending, the United States remains far ahead of the rest, contributing $935 billion in 2024, equal to 3.2% of its GDP and more than the rest of NATO combined.

Among European members, Poland stood out with 4.1% of its GDP going to defence, followed by Estonia and Latvia, each at 3.4%.

As NATO leaders seek common ground in a time of uncertainty, the tension between urgent spending demands and national preferences continues to challenge the alliance’s unity.

A United Nations peacekeeper from Zambia was killed in the Central African Republic (CAR) during an ambush by suspected Sudanese armed groups, the UN confirmed on Tuesday. The attack occurred on Friday near CAR’s northern border with Sudan, a volatile region increasingly marked by cross-border violence and the presence of armed militias.

According to a statement from the UN peacekeeping mission in CAR (MINUSCA), the incident also left another peacekeeper injured and currently receiving medical treatment. The fallen peacekeeper was a member of the Zambian military contingent serving under MINUSCA, which is tasked with helping to stabilize one of Africa’s most fragile states.

“The members of the Security Council expressed their deep concern over the increasing number of attacks against peacekeepers in the Central African Republic,” said the Office of the Spokesperson for the UN Secretary-General, echoing growing international anxiety over the deteriorating security environment in the region.

Zambia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs also condemned the attack and called for accountability and justice for those responsible.

This marks the third attack on UN peacekeepers in CAR in 2025 alone, underscoring the persistent instability in a country gripped by violence since 2013. The conflict was triggered when mostly Muslim rebels ousted President François Bozizé, sparking waves of inter-communal violence and plunging the nation into prolonged turmoil.

A peace agreement signed in 2019 offered a brief window of hope, but six of the 14 signatory armed groups later pulled out, reigniting tensions and complicating the UN’s peacekeeping mission. Armed groups continue to clash with government forces and each other, frequently targeting international personnel and humanitarian workers.

CAR was also one of the first African nations to formally engage Russia-backed paramilitary forces, who were brought in to support the government and fight insurgent groups. While the presence of these forces was meant to bolster state security, they have been accused of human rights abuses and are believed by some analysts to be fueling further conflict rather than resolving it.

As the UN and regional leaders call for restraint and accountability, Friday’s deadly attack highlights the risks faced by peacekeepers working in high-conflict zones and raises urgent questions about the future of international security efforts in CAR.

A group of U.S. lawmakers from both major parties has proposed legislation aimed at preventing federal executive agencies from using artificial intelligence systems developed in China, such as those from DeepSeek.

The proposed legislation, called the “No Adversarial AI Act,” follows intelligence assessments indicating that DeepSeek may be supporting Chinese military and espionage efforts and has reportedly utilized “large volumes” of Nvidia chips.

DeepSeek made waves in the AI sector earlier this year by claiming it had built a system that could rival major U.S. platforms like ChatGPT—at a fraction of the cost. Since those claims, concerns over data protection have led some American institutions and companies to stop using DeepSeek’s technology. The current administration under President Donald Trump has also considered banning the tool on government-owned devices.

The bill—presented in the House by Michigan Republican John Moolenaar and Illinois Democrat Raja Krishnamoorthi—seeks to establish a standing policy that would forbid the adoption of AI models from countries considered U.S. adversaries. The proposal extends beyond China to include Russia, Iran, and North Korea.

Under the new framework, the Federal Acquisition Security Council would be tasked with compiling and maintaining a list of restricted AI systems originating from these nations.

Government departments would be restricted from purchasing or utilizing any AI tools on that list unless granted a specific exemption by Congress or the Office of Management and Budget—for instance, in the case of research needs. There is also a clause allowing for the removal of a technology from the list if it can be demonstrated that it is not under foreign adversarial control or influence.

“The U.S. must draw a hard line: hostile AI systems have no business operating inside our government,” Moolenaar said in a statement. “This legislation creates a permanent firewall to keep adversary AI out of our most sensitive networks – where the cost of compromise is simply too high.”

Additional sponsors of the bill in the House include Representatives Ritchie Torres of New York and Darin LaHood of Illinois. Senators Rick Scott from Florida and Gary Peters from Michigan will champion the legislation in the Senate.