BRUSSELS, June 6 (Xinhua) -- NATO defense ministers meeting in Brussels on Thursday "broadly" agreed to pursue a significant increase in member states' military spending to 5 percent of GDP. However, sharp disagreements over the timeline and spending categories revealed deep divisions ahead of the alliance's upcoming summit in The Hague, scheduled for June 24-25.

"There's broad support. We are really close," Mark Rutte, NATO's secretary general, told reporters after the meeting. He stressed that he has "total confidence that we will get there" by the next NATO summit in three weeks.

Rutte proposed a compromise plan: setting a target of 3.5 percent of GDP for core military spending, and an additional 1.5 percent for broader security-related areas such as infrastructure, by 2032.

Mounting U.S. Pressure

Member states are facing increasing pressure from the United States, which first floated the 5 percent target late last year. Washington has repeatedly urged its allies to raise defense budgets under the threat of reducing its security commitments in Europe.

"To be an alliance, you got to be more than flags. You got to be formations. You got to be more than conferences. You need to be, keep combat-ready capabilities," U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said as he arrived for the meeting of defense ministers on Thursday.

He acknowledged ongoing disagreements, saying, "There are a few countries that are not quite there yet... We will get them there."

DIVISIONS ON TIMELINE, SPENDING CATEGORIES

The sharpest differences emerged over the 2032 deadline and which expenditures count toward the two categories. While some countries criticized the timeline as too slow, others argued that the target is unattainable given current budgetary and industrial limitations.

Lithuanian Defense Minister Dovile Sakaliene pushed for an earlier deadline, insisting that 2032 is "definitely too late" and advocating for a 2030 target. Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur noted Estonia would reach 5 percent by next year and urged other nations to follow suit within five years.

In contrast, countries such as Spain, Germany, and Belgium expressed concerns about feasibility. For them, meeting the 5 percent goal would be "extremely difficult." The United Kingdom and Italy, meanwhile, are aiming for a more moderate goal of raising core defense spending to 3.5 percent of GDP by 2035.

According to NATO data, 23 of its 32 members are expected to meet the 2-percent-of-GDP defense spending threshold by the end of this summer. Spain and Italy have pledged to reach that level by year-end, while Canada projects compliance by 2027.

New Capability Targets Amid Financial Constraints

Defense ministers also approved updated NATO capability targets, which outline the military capacities needed to support operational plans and ensure collective defense. Priorities include air and missile defense, long-range strike capabilities, logistics, and large-scale land maneuver forces.

Germany pledged a strong contribution to NATO's military expansion, with Defense Minister Boris Pistorius announcing plans to add 60,000 active-duty troops.

"Given Germany's size and economic strength, we will shoulder a significant part of NATO's military build-up," Pistorius said. However, Germany continues to grapple with personnel shortages. Despite ramped-up recruitment, troop numbers fell further last year, while the average age of soldiers continued to rise.

Across the alliance, economic headwinds and tight national budgets pose further obstacles. The Netherlands estimates it will need to spend an additional 16 to 19 billion euros (18.24 to 21.66 billion U.S. dollars) annually to meet its obligations, Dutch Defense Minister Ruben Brekelmans told parliament.

Belgium's Budget Minister Vincent Van Peteghem cautioned in April that increased defense expenditures could come at the cost of welfare programs.

"Every euro that's a deficit today ... is a euro that will be debt, and that debt will be one day a tax or a cut and in the social welfare state," he told the Financial Times. "Defense definitely requires our full attention, but so does also the sustainability of our welfare state." ■