5% of GDP. That's the defence-spending target Admiral Giuseppe Cavo Dragone said NATO is moving toward as he sought to calm public tension with the United States. Speaking in Singapore on May 30 at the Shangri-La Dialogue, Dragone told Bloomberg’s Haslinda Amin that military-to-military relations with Washington are steady and that NATO’s defence planning process will deliver the forces the alliance needs. His remarks followed blunt comments by U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth at the same forum, underscoring a split in tone between senior NATO military leadership and a senior U.S. civilian official.
Calm and confrontation sat side by side in Singapore: one senior NATO military officer stressing steadiness, one senior U.S. civilian warning of consequences for lagging allies.
Military reassurance, political pressure
Admiral Giuseppe Cavo Dragone, chair of NATO’s Military Committee, told Bloomberg’s Haslinda Amin at the Shangri-La Dialogue that "as a military side, we don't have any drama going on" with the United States. He framed his comments around capability planning, saying NATO is on track to reach what he described as a 5% of GDP defence-spending target and that "we have a NATO defense planning process to give us the capability that we need, and we will acquire that in time. So I think we're in a good shape."
Dragone was speaking to reporters on May 30 in Singapore, and his aim was partly to reassure national capitals and publics that military channels remain functional even as political leaders trade sharper words. He pointed to the alliance planning cycle as the mechanism that will produce the personnel and equipment NATO requires, a line meant to dampen concern that rhetoric from political figures could translate into operational friction.
U.S. civilian warning and European response
Hours earlier at the same Shangri-La forum, U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth delivered pointed remarks about European defence spending. He accused European countries of being slow to increase defence budgets, saying, "For too long, polite pleas from our European allies to spend more on their own defense fell on deaf ears." He added, "Allies who refuse to step up and carry their own weight for our collective defense will face a clear shift in how we do business."
Hegseth used comparisons with the Asia-Pacific to make his case about alliance management, arguing that when U.S. interests align with partners in the Pacific, Washington and its partners "act together with focused resolve," and when interests diverge, the United States "adjust[s] pragmatically without the drama or the moralizing." He also criticized what he described as decades of policy choices in Europe that opened borders while hollowing out militaries, and urged Western Europe to take note.
The public juxtaposition of Dragone and Hegseth matters because it frames how capitals in NATO will respond politically to mounting U.S. pressure. Bloomberg’s account noted that European governments have already moved to increase defence spending in response to pressure from the United States, including pressure coming from President Donald Trump. That raises the question of whether sharper U.S. rhetoric will accelerate budget decisions or simply harden political debate.
The exchange followed last week’s meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Helsingborg, Sweden on May 22, where political leaders discussed burden-sharing and alliance cohesion. Dragone’s assurances were offered as a close to the immediate public exchange between NATO’s military leadership and the U.S. civilian defence chief, signalling that military planners believe they can deliver what politicians demand even amid heated rhetoric.
There is a practical point behind Dragone’s calm. NATO’s defence planning process is, by design, meant to translate national pledges into collective capabilities. If that process works as he described, the alliance should be able to field the forces needed to meet its strategy without breakdowns in command, logistics or interoperability. Dragone’s public line is an attempt to separate implementation from political theatre.
Still, Hegseth’s comments set a political calendar for Europe. They make clear that some in Washington want faster, deeper shifts in national budgets and procurement choices. How individual NATO members respond will depend on domestic politics, fiscal room and the calculations made at recent meetings such as the Helsingborg foreign ministers gathering.
For now, NATO’s military chief is offering a simple message to allies and publics: the alliance’s planners have a path to the capabilities they want, and the military relationship with the United States is functioning. That message aims to steady a partnership at a moment when civilian diplomacy and public rhetoric are testing political cohesion.
Related Articles
- France seeks role in UK Germany 2,000 km missile push
- 600 Troops Take Part in Serbia's First NATO Drill
- U.S. 440 kg demand could end Iran's nuclear file
The number Dragone returned was concrete: 5% of GDP. That figure now stands as the public benchmark around which NATO military planning, U.S. pressure and European budget decisions will be measured. Watch whether national budget cycles translate those pledges into new forces and equipment in the next round of defence budgets.
This article was created with AI assistance.
