Should the U.K. defend other NATO countries that maintain low military defense budgets relative to their GDP?
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is an intergovernmental military alliance formed by 28 countries in 1949 after the Second World War. To join NATO each member country pledged to spend at least 2% of their GDP on military spending and defense and defend each other against threats from any non-member country. In a July 2016 interview with the New York Times Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump suggested that the United States would not defend NATO member countries who had failed to increase their military budgets to above 2% of Gross Domestic Product. The suggestion defie…
Read moreStatistics are shown for this demographic
Parish
City
Response rates from 168 Leeds voters.
77% Yes |
23% No |
63% Yes |
20% No |
14% Yes, and refusing to defend other NATO countries sets a dangerous precedent for the balance of global power |
2% No, and we should withdraw from NATO |
1% No, we should not defend any NATO country that spends less than 2% of their GDP on military defense |
Trend of support over time for each answer from 168 Leeds voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Trend of how important this issue is for 168 Leeds voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from Leeds voters whose views went beyond the provided options.
@B5N86Z94wks4W
The UK should in principle defend all member states of NATO in accordance with the Treaty, but this should not preclude using the real threat of withdrawing support in order to ensure all member states maintain their Treaty obligations.
@B24R76S6mos6MO
Yes, but put less effort into the defense of NATO countries that spend less than 2% of their GDP on military defense
@9QC2V7812mos12MO
NO. Like most NATO is old and out of date for the modern world. Time for a newer World Treaty Organization!
@9Q98P7J12mos12MO
Yes, but at the same time, encourage that Country to up it's share to 2% of their GDP otherwise funding will be pulled.
@9Q953CS12mos12MO
You cannot mandate arbiterially the amount a country should spend as their are economics of scale. However, countries should layout what they can afford and how much they will spend to protect themselves and others if they are part of a security pact, and this should be conditional to membership - if they fail to meet a stated obligation, then they are on their own should another country engage militarily with them.
@9Q7MSVH12mos12MO
Maintain defence but raise their requirements over time to a minimum standard when financial capable
@9PQRKN81yr1Y
I think this has to be considered case by case but in principle I think we should defend nato countries from invasion and attack.
@9PQ999R1yr1Y
Yes, but they should be encouraged to increase their expenditure and given restricted power in decision making unless they increase their expenditure
Stay up-to-date on the most recent “NATO” news articles, updated frequently.
Join in on the most popular conversations.
