Search

NATO Conference: Biden Wants NATO Members To Pay Two Percent. History Shows Him How

Joe Biden Speaks at the NATO Conference

In a last ditch attempt to save the Empire, the 1902 Imperial Conference saw the British Empire try to get its dominions to pay their fair share of defence spending. As is shown by the lack of a “British Empire” delegation at yesterday’s conference, this didn’t work. With an ammunition crisis in Ukraine, today’s NATO Conference is likely to focus on getting NATO members to step up defence spending by reaching the 2% target. Here’s what America should learn from history.

What Do Countries Want From The NATO Conference?

In the context of public and private calls to step down, Biden’s speech yesterday portrayed strength and unity, calling NATO “more powerful than ever” emphasising the need for NATO to rally together for this “pivotal moment” in Russia’s war against Ukraine. Behind the scenes, however, the summit is expected to be more sober. Going into the NATO Conference, American politicians have raised concern with Canada’s failure to meet the mandatory target of spending 2% of GDP on the military Biden’s ambassador to Canada calling the country “the outlier in the entire alliance”.

Unfortunately, Canada is less of an outlier than might be hoped, being in the majority of Nato’s thirty-two members, twenty of whom do not meet the 2% spending target. With Ukraine running out of ammunition and the prospect of a second Trump presidency becoming more likely, Biden, along with other world leaders such as Keir Starmer are expected to use the NATO Conference to push hard for other members to pay their share and expand European contribution to Ukraine.

America is not the only one with significant objections with NATO’s structure. The broadly anti-NATO Popular front won the largest share of seats on France’s election on Sunday, with even the Atlanticist-minded Macron calling for the EU’s ‘Strategic Autonomy’ from the United States. Even with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, polling and public statements show that non-American NATO members have some frustration with their perceived lack of sovereignty in foreign policy.

The NATO Conference is not the first time a hegemonic power had to guide hesitant states to contribute their fair share to a military alliance, 122 years ago, the UK found itself in the same situation.

NATO and the 1902 Imperial Conference

The 1902 Imperial Conference was a meeting between the so-called self-governing ‘White Commonwealth’ nations to discuss collective foreign policy. Just as in yesterday’s NATO conference, the issues of the 1902 Imperial Conference were mainly on the imbalance of defence spending, in this case shouldered primarily by the UK. In 1895, of the Empire’s £18,2000,000 defence budget, only around £200,000 was paid by the dominions. Whilst British criticisms of this system was more passive aggressive than America’s to NATO, opposition to this set-up was still significant.

To protest this arrangement, the Imperial Federation Defence Committee, a pressure group with connections to several high members of government, was set up, calling the UK’s shouldering of defence spending as “a manifest inequality on the British taxpayer”. Going into the 1902 conference, with perceived Colonial inaction in the Second Boer War in the background, Colonial Minister Joseph Chamberlain was keen to push for Dominions to pay their fair share. Cautious of not upsetting dominions, similar to Biden his first speech emphasised “unity” with little in the way of specifics, before calling for a more equitable share of defence spending.

As the conference deteriorated, British delegates got as angry as Victorian parlance would permit, with Lord of the Admiralty telling his Canadian counterpart “the British taxpayer by no means gets the benefit himself of all the expenditure for which he pays,”. Despite the increasing frustration of British delegates, the Canadian PM Wilfred Laurier wouldn’t budge.

Canada’s position in 1902 was summed up by the President of its Board of Trade as “pay and say”; Canada was willing to pay a proportional share for defence in exchange for an equal say in the Empire’s foreign policy. The UK, however, didn’t see a genuine desire for unity, but a dominion trying to flake out of its commitments. With Mike Johnson referring to the country as “riding America’s coattails,”, it seems America has once again failed to see this nuance. With a stronger NATO more crucial than ever, America needs to listen to NATO’s constituent members rather than engage in the imperial chauvinism that destroyed the British Empire

Final Thought

In the case of Britain, its push for Unity the failure to reach a compelling deal with dominions on defence spending gradually caused the country to see its dominions as a liability, eventually leading to the breakup of the Empire altogether. With Europeans sceptical of American dominance, America should emphasise its opposition to unilateral action, renewing its commitment to consensus-based decision-making through the Atlantic Council.

To view Chamber UK’s other foreign policy please click here.

This article was written by Chamber’s features writer, Alex Connor

Share

Related Topics

Latest

Housing Dilemma: What Type of Housing Do We Need?

Inverness and the Highlands face a pressing housing challenge that affects both the ageing population and essential healthcare workers. Mixed housing options can create sustainable, inclusive communities while addressing affordability and accessibility concerns. By integrating housing policy into local and healthcare planning, we can build a future that supports all generations.

Trump’s Ukraine Deal: What It Means for the UK

Donald Trump’s latest diplomatic manoeuvres have sent shockwaves through Europe. With plans for direct peace talks with Vladimir Putin, the former US president appears willing to push Ukraine into territorial concessions. But what does this mean for the UK? From military strategy to diplomatic alliances, Britain now faces a critical test of its role in European security. With NATO unity at stake and Ukraine’s sovereignty hanging by a thread, the UK must decide whether to step up or risk being sidelined.

Video Features

Health and Social Care Reforms: Facing the Challenges, Building the Future

Revolutionising Healthcare Diagnostics: A Call to Arms

NHS & Life Sciences: Harnessing Innovation For Global Health

Screening and Diagnostics: Advancing the Frontiers of Healthcare

Subscribe to our newsletter for your free digital copy of the journal!

Receive our latest insights, future journals as soon as they are published and get invited to our exclusive events and webinars.

Newsletter Signups
?
?

We respect your privacy and will not share your email address with any third party. Your personal data will be collected and handled in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

Never miss an issue by subcribing to our newsletter!

Receive our latest insights and all future journals as soon as they are published and get invited to our exclusive events and webinars.

Newsletter Signups
?
?

We respect your privacy and will not share your email address with any third party. Your personal data will be collected and handled in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

Never miss an issue by subcribing to our newsletter!

Receive our latest insights and all future journals as soon as they are published and get invited to our exclusive events and webinars.

Newsletter Signups
?
?

We respect your privacy and will not share your email address with any third party. Your personal data will be collected and handled in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

Newsletter Signup

Receive our latest insights as soon as they are published and get invited to our exclusive events and webinars.

Newsletter Signups
?
?

We respect your privacy and will not share your email address with any third party. Your personal data will be collected and handled in accordance with our Privacy Policy.