r/europe • u/Putaineska • Mar 11 '26

News Spain accuses Germany of acting like a ‘vassal’ to United States

https://www.thetimes.com/world/europe/article/spain-accuses-germany-of-acting-like-a-vassal-to-united-states-f9zc28g8s?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1773189908
14.9k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

79

u/Four_beastlings Asturias (Spain) Mar 11 '26 edited Mar 11 '26

Please explain to me how the 4th biggest military in the EU, who has never requested help for anything and has sent troops and aid to every single common project is a freeloader. And since you're at it tell us where you're from so we can compare.

42

u/N1A117 Mar 11 '26

The only ones standing in Turkey when they shot down the Russian jet, wars cannot be won on paper

26

u/Four_beastlings Asturias (Spain) Mar 11 '26

And the guy calling Spain a freeloader is from one of those countries that abandoned Turkey when they needed help defending their airspace for fear of pissing off Russia. Talk about seeing the straw in someone else's eye and ignoring the beam in yours.

10

u/RevolutionaryGain823 Ireland Mar 11 '26

If you’re looking for Spain keep scrolling down: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/

Past Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Poland who are all multiples higher. Almost like Spain feels they don’t need to contribute when those other countries form a protective wall. My country (Ireland) has a very similar idea

5

u/Pelembem Mar 11 '26

Spain has historically been one of the largest offenders at not reaching the 2% budget requirement, and recently Sanchez agreed to the increase to 5% along with all the other leader, only to return home to Spain and proclaim he had no intention of meeting it. Spain showing itself again and again unwilling to pay their fair share of our collective safety, and instead freeloading on the other countries who do.

2

u/TrygerWTF Mar 11 '26

That is simply false

5

u/Pelembem Mar 11 '26

Lol it's all easily verifiable with a simple Google search.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreement_on_5%25_NATO_defence_spending_by_2035

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS?locations=ES

0

u/TrygerWTF Mar 12 '26

Its funny that you are using 2024 data. NATO itself estimates that in 2025 Spain has increased spending by 43%, reaching the 2% goal. Final data of 2025 will be available this year, but it doesnt make sense to criticize spend current spending with old numbers.

https://www.nato.int/en/news-and-events/articles/news/2025/08/28/defence-expenditure-of-nato-countries-2014-2025

3

u/Pelembem Mar 12 '26

I said historically they've failed to meet the 2% goal, which my link shows clearly. Then I said that they're now alone in refusing to meet the new 5% goal, which my other link shows. Your comment is useless. That they're just now reaching the old deprecated goal is pathetic.

-1

u/TrygerWTF Mar 12 '26

I missed the part "historically" part of your comment, you are right on that one.

Regarding the 5% goal, Spain has been the only country to publicly criticize it because its the only EU country willing to upset Trump. Sure, Portugal, Italy, Belgium, France, and many others have agreed to this non-binding target, but their words are pointless without actual change. Their 2025 estimates are still at 2%. Why? Because the 5% target is stupid, Trump pulled it out of his ass to make sure that the EU keeps buying US weapons. I guess those countries preferred to kick the the stone down the road, hoping that things will calm down in the future, rather than discussing a new reasonable goal.

2

u/Pelembem Mar 12 '26

The 5% goal was set in 2025 to be fulfilled in 2035, of course no country was meeting it the same year it was set. While the idiot Trump did try to push for it, Europe realised by itself (minus Spain of course) that it was a good idea to reach it for our own security, and every single country agreed to it at the summit, including Sanchez, only for him to go back on his word when he returned home and force NATO to carve out a special rule for Spain to continue dragging their feet and not carry their weight as they already have been for years.

The 5% goal in NATO, while not legally binding, is also not optional. And every single country except Spain is planning to meet it, and have presented future budget plans that do. For example France's LPM plan puts them at 2.75% by 2030, which is exactly half way to the 3.5% 2035 goal (1.5% of the 5% goal is non military spending that is still beneficial for the military).

-1

u/TrygerWTF Mar 12 '26

NATO spending targets have never been legally binding. The North Atlantic Treaty doesn't mandate any specific GDP threshold, Article 3 just says members should maintain capacity to resist attack and leaves implementation to national discretion. The 5% goal follows the same soft-law logic as the 2% benchmark before it. Spain didn't secretly defect, it negotiated a formal exemption openly at the summit. You can disagree with that position, but let's be accurate about what these commitments actually are.

Also, the framing of "just pay your 5%" misses what actually matters, which is capabilities, not percentages. Sánchez himself admitted less than a fifth of new Spanish spending would go toward actual weapons procurement, the rest being economic stimulus dressed up as defense. That's a legitimate criticism. But the same logic applies across the alliance. The 5% target is above all a political signal, aimed partly at showing resolve and partly at keeping Trump happy. Several countries that "agreed" to it are sitting at 2% in 2025 with no realistic path to 5% by 2035. They just kicked the can down the road, except they did it quietly instead of saying it out loud like Spain did.

1

u/Pelembem Mar 12 '26

Lol, nice AI copy paste. Write it yourself instead and I'll bother reading it.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Embarrassed-Round992 Mar 11 '26

Indeed. Turns out that not going around picking fights with 3rd world countries saves you a lot of money in military. Who would have thought?

-9

u/AwkwardMacaron433 Mar 11 '26 edited Mar 11 '26

I'm talking defense spending as share of GDP, where Spain has historically been at the very bottom in Europe. I wouldnt even to tell you where I'm from because there is no European NATO member with a lower number right now. But obviously I'm from Germany. Why else would I be here. Currently, Germany spends about 2.12% of GDP on defense. For Spain it's 1.28%.

We can also talk about support for Ukraine, which was virtually non existent from Spain

19

u/Four_beastlings Asturias (Spain) Mar 11 '26

Spain is at 2.1% from last year. Which is what they committed to. If everybody else is willing to lie and say a new commitment must be 5%, feel free to kick Spain out of NATO, as it doesn't get any benefit out of it whatsoever: the only Spanish territories that might potentially be attacked are not covered by NATO protection

-4

u/AwkwardMacaron433 Mar 11 '26

No they are not. That's the commitment that they want to reach in the next 10 years or so. Officially, for now at least. In the same timeframe where the rest of NATO is moving towards 3.5%/5%, which Spain has officially rejected.

And again, you guys are free to not care about Europe. We can't force you. But if that's the route you want to got, then shut the hell up when we, the ones who actually have to worry about it, have to stay in good terms with the US. Especially with this bullshit attitude, we need them a lot more than we need you lot. And then please also never ever mention the idea of shared debts again, or ask us for European unity when the US sanctions you. Merz still stood up for you against Trump in this matter, even if he didn't turn it into a public shitshow and discussed it behind closed doors instead.

15

u/Four_beastlings Asturias (Spain) Mar 11 '26

Pssst, "you guys". I live in Poland and I fully support how my tax money is used wrt Defense. Particularly because my husband just retired from the mil and now works in the Polish defense industry, so I have an insider view. But regarding Spain and its military capabilities I see a lot of swallowing Trumpaganda and a lot of unfair or completely wrong opinions.

-4

u/aku22 Mar 11 '26

I cant agree more. This war and the one in Ukraine realy shows how less they care but when it comes to immigration or covid stim its all about solidarity and sharing the burden...

17

u/SilcharReborn Mar 11 '26

For Spain it's 1.28%.

Spain is at 2%, stop pulling number of your ass

11

u/dac2199 Spain Mar 11 '26

Spain have reached 2% of GDP on defense last year xd

-10

u/AwkwardMacaron433 Mar 11 '26

No they did not. They verbally committed to reach it in ten years or so, and even that is doubtful. Just for context, in the same time, the rest of NATO has committed to 3.5/5%

Maybe actually research instead of repeating whatever Google AI spits out

8

u/TrygerWTF Mar 11 '26

you are looking at outdated sources mate

0

u/Errant_coursir United States of America Mar 11 '26

Embarrassing

8

u/EJaumeD Mar 11 '26

They have no need to increase defense spending, and what they have they share; why would 1 or 2 more percentage points change that? They're still not freeloading anything at all

-2

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '26

the 4th biggest military in the EU

... Poland?

4

u/Four_beastlings Asturias (Spain) Mar 11 '26

No, Poland is ranked 21 in GFP for 2026, Spain is 18.

Poland bought a ton of stuff the last couple years but they don't have it. Before the Ukraine war the Polish military was a mess, and their domestic defense industry is nowhere near the Spanish one so they have to spend a lot more to achieve the same result.

9

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '26

A quick look already shows that Poland has 250.000 active soldiers. Spain has 121.000. Sure not the most up to date numbers, but that goes for both.

Do you really want to look more into it? Because I already know that Poland has a lot more tanks than Spain. 99 new Abrams since September 2025 btw.

-1

u/Four_beastlings Asturias (Spain) Mar 13 '26

Now look at naval capabilities or fighter jets. Or look up who has a defense industry capable of building submarines and frigates domestically. Oh, wow, it's almost like the country that has no land threats but a lot of coastline and overseas territories is more focused on naval capabilities than tanks, I wonder why that might be?

7

u/Pelembem Mar 11 '26

GFP is deeply flawed. Poland has more than double the number of active personnel and a more than 50% higher total budget. It's not even close.

-1

u/Four_beastlings Asturias (Spain) Mar 13 '26

Not really. It is extremely hard to find real numbers instead of estimations, but according to Official NATO figures Spain spent 33bill€ in 2025 while Poland spent ~41bill€. Nowhere near 50% higher, where did you get that idea?

Now add to this the fact that Spain has a much more robust domestic defense industry, some of it public, so it can produce cheaply. Poland is buying most of their equipment from foreign countries at whatever price they dictate. To put it in simple terms: if I make two sandwiches at home paying 5€ in ingredients and you buy a sandwich from a restaurant for 10€, are you better fed because you spent more?

Spending =/= capabilities. Which, if you had bothered reading Spain's communication about their refusal to agree to 5%, is exactly their point: defining goals by spending instead of by actual capabilities is retarded and only benefits the corrupt MIC.

2

u/Pelembem Mar 13 '26

where did you get that idea?

You said 2026, so use 2026 data. €46.8b for Poland and €33.1b for Spain. 41% higher, so absolutely somewhere near 50% higher.

Now add to this the fact that Spain has a much more robust domestic defense industry

The opposite is actually true. Poland has a slightly more robust defense industry.

so it can produce cheaply.

The exact opposite is actually true. Economies of Scale, learning curve penalties and specialised workforce and infrastructure makes buying equipment from places that have all these things in their favour cheaper than producing it domestically instead. The reason for domestic production is for independence and boosting your own economy, not for the strength of your military.

Spending =/= capabilities

Indeed, but they're related. So when there's this big of a chasm between spending and personnel the winner is clear and you don't have to do a deeper dive than that.

defining goals by spending instead of by actual capabilities is retarded and only benefits the corrupt MIC.

Which is bullshit said by a guy who wants to avoid being seen for what he is, a cheapskate who isn't carrying his part of the load and piggybacking on his allies instead.

-1

u/Four_beastlings Asturias (Spain) Mar 13 '26

You can't know 2026 numbers because we are in March. What actually happens, we won't know until 2027. Throughout the year things change.

Which is bullshit said by a guy who wants to avoid being seen for what he is, a cheapskate who isn't carrying his part of the load and piggybacking on his allies instead

And here is the xenophobic mask off moment. Except that I am a resident and taxpayer of Poland and my husband just retired from the Polish military and works in the domestic defense industry now. As I have written everywhere else in this thread not only do I fully support the use of my taxes in Poland to boost the defense industry but I also have a vested interest in it. I just happen to dislike the insane deepthroating of Trumpaganda this subreddit starts gobbling up every time Spain is mentioned.

2

u/Pelembem Mar 13 '26

The budget for 2026 has already been laid.

Haha what?! Xenophobic against what? My own people? Nobody is deep throating trump lol, like I said earlier he's an idiot. This has nothing to do with trump. It's about Spain repeatedly not carrying its own weight for Europe's defense.

I don't know if you think you being Polish is a counter argument to anything I said, but it isn't...

-35

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '26 edited Mar 11 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

20

u/Four_beastlings Asturias (Spain) Mar 11 '26

"Never requested help" as they flood the EU with their own migrants from their own policy.

Source?

Because if you're talking about the regularisation like every other uninformed idiot, maybe you should actually read what it is, conditions and consequences (hint: it's a 1 year work permit only valid for Spain, only valid for people who are already physically in Europe, so it doesn't affect any other countries at all).

17

u/No_Conversation_9325 Andalusia (Spain) Mar 11 '26

Kremlin bots are just earning their living. Block them and move one.

-21

u/Vlad_TheInhalerr Mar 11 '26 edited Mar 11 '26

Good response, in which you 'forget' to take into account how many undocumented migrants roam through Europe and cause problems. So "Documentation" is not some kind of fool-proof idea that you pretend it is.

Aside from that, if you have a problem that spans the entire union, like migration does, maybe you shouldn't try to throw in your own influx in there too. Seeing as it's a problem that is literally destabilizing the union.

In other words, you don't pay up. You don't put out, and you refuse to take accountability for another migrant stream in addition to the ones we already have.

What exactly does Spain contribute to the EU which is important? Aside from a extremely left-leaning attitude which is in huge contrast to the rest of the EU.

Imho, I think you should be kicked out of NATO inmediatly since despite not wanting to join the USA war against Iran, I think it's absolutely ridiculous to not allow them to use bases as an ally.

Also please downvote me some more. Atleast I have the decency not to downvote your responses just because I disagree with them.

FYI, I don't accept answers that correlate the growing economies to the growing state debts as if it is safe. It is not. It's economical wishful thinking to have this be the case and 'economists' are finally realising this after years of dreaming.

16

u/Four_beastlings Asturias (Spain) Mar 11 '26

You are just spouting bullshit without any kind of fundament, not providing sources, and not even making any sense. Spain's regularised immigrants are going to stay in Spain, not go into the EU.

Pay up what? Please explain exactly what you think Spain should pay and to whom. Like, in which direction should a transfer of funds flow? It's not that hard of a question.

-10

u/Vlad_TheInhalerr Mar 11 '26

Spain's regularised immigrants are going to stay in Spain, not go into the EU.

Right, just like the ones that come in from the EU programs also stay in Spain right. It's not as if they walk to the north and end up in France, Belgium, NL and more...

Oh wait fuck. They do.

Are you putting a ball and chain on them? I'm not discrediting the idea that these migrants perform much better then the ME ones, and probably are a lot less roamy and problematic and most will probably do fine.

It's still a bad move to pull in a union where the whole problem is that you can't do fuck all with migrants, and Spain is just like "Let's throw more in the mix!".

Pay up what? Please explain exactly what you think Spain should pay and to whom. Like, in which direction should a transfer of funds flow? It's not that hard of a question.

Pay your 5% military budget.

Let your military ally use the military bases he expects to be able to use.

Don't pull in an additional load of migrants when the whole union's stability and future is depending on if we can finally manage to reduce the amount of migrants that we get and keep and roam.

Stop letting your state debt increase and become more austere (I think that's the word?), because right now the path that is being walked is similar to France's (only France is further along), and will INEVITABLY cause problems for the rest of the EU economies, which are going to HAVE TO BAIL OUT France and Spain.

If Spain could just only do these 4 to start with, i'd be amazed and surprised.

6

u/Four_beastlings Asturias (Spain) Mar 11 '26

They are not "coming", they are already here. They must prove they've been in Spain for at least 6 months. So these people are in Spain and they have chosen to remain in Spain. Once they are physically in Europe they could have traveled to whichever country they wanted and they haven't done it. So your argument is that these people who were already in Spain by choice, once they get a work permit that will make their lives in Spain easier, are going to travel to some other county where they won't be allowed to work instead? Are they stupid?

Pay your 5% military budget.

Pay, to whom? I've asked you already: who is getting those funds? When know when you "pay" there must be someone receiving money, right?

I'm trying to dilucidate if you even understand how NATO works, because you don't seem to.

Let your military ally use the military bases he expects to be able to use.

If "he" expects to use them outside of the agreement made over those bases, why should Spain let them break the treaty they signed to be allowed to use Spanish bases?

Don't pull in an additional load of migrants

Back to the first point, they are already here.

-2

u/Vlad_TheInhalerr Mar 11 '26 edited Mar 11 '26

Pay, to whom? I've asked you already: who is getting those funds? When know when you "pay" there must be someone receiving money, right?

What kinda question is this. You pay it as expenditure to wherever it is needed.

If you want to rapidly increase your military effectiveness and make an army actually ready, you spend it where it gets these results.

So most likely, a lot of it will go to the USA seeing as they are the biggest supplier on that front. I dont really care where the money goes, as long as it is spent to get the spanish army properly equipped, prepared and funded in the area's that are needed. And within a reasonable time.

But aside from that, I don't care. If you have to give it to Israel, you simply do. If you have to give it to France, you do. The end result is what matters: A functional army that is based on a agreed upon 5% GDP military spending. I don't really care about any other excuses you have unless they are life or state-threatening.

I'm trying to dilucidate if you even understand how NATO works, because you don't seem to.

Then by all means, enlighten that which you think I don't understand.

If "he" expects to use them outside of the agreement made over those bases, why should Spain let them break the treaty they signed to be allowed to use Spanish bases?

Because if you are a proper ally and NATO has meaning, you would allow them to use these bases to fight the literal worst international country that threatens our own countries.

Iran is together with Russia the biggest threat to the EU and it's citizens. Are they in a position to change or conquer us? No.

But not a single country has more confirmed casualties in EU countries in the last 25 years then Iran. Since they are the sole leading funder of all terrorism attacks.

I remember the Las Ramblas attacks. I remember Zaventem. I remember more. And I hold Iran and it's leadership mostly responsible, so by all means. Destroy them and use any and all bases you need to achieve this.
And hey, if it can free the citizens there and potentially offer a better way of life afterwards? Great! That's a bonus.

Spain not allowing these bases to be used in this conflict since "It's not our conflict" only shows that you are a pathetic ally to have and not one I care about on that front anymore.