Why NATO's 5% spending target won’t matter without troops to back it up

For the first time in the alliance’s 76-year history, a NATO ally has engaged a Russian threat in its own airspace. Polish air defence forces shot down three Russian drones last month, with additional downed drones later discovered across NATO’s eastern flank. The incident serves as a stress test of the alliance’s resolve, highlighting both Moscow’s willingness to probe NATO defences and the alliance’s urgent need to strengthen its readiness. While attention in the coming weeks will rightly focus on reinforcing air defences, the incident reveals a deeper vulnerability: NATO’s growing shortage of military personnel.

NATO currently lacks the manpower to fully implement its regional defence plans—let alone deter an increasingly assertive Russia or fulfil the ambitious transformation goals agreed at June’s NATO Summit. Nearly all member states are struggling to recruit sufficient troops, as highlighted in an article published by National Interest.

The problem is compounded by poor troop retention across various armies, which undermines efforts to counter a still manpower-heavy Russian military, even after Moscow’s heavy battlefield losses. Europe’s demographic decline and widening civil-military divide further exacerbate the challenge, according to the article.

Even if member states meet the new pledge to spend 5% of GDP on defence, its author warns that closing manpower gaps may prove far more difficult than simply writing larger cheques. On average, NATO allies allocate roughly 36% of their total defence budgets to manpower, with some, such as Italy, spending nearly 60%.

As NATO allies prepare to invest unprecedented sums in their collective security, they must also develop innovative strategies to overcome recruitment challenges, expand their talent pipelines, and ensure that ambitious defence goals are matched by equally ambitious workforce strategies.

By examining the circumstances in three key alliance members, the article illustrates the depth of the challenge:

Germany

Berlin’s defence ambitions remain constrained by cultural resistance to military service. Germany has pledged to expand its enlisted ranks by 30,000 over six years to build Europe’s “strongest armed force.” However, experts note that these targets remain too modest to provide credible national defence. Moreover, manpower shortages have made Berlin hesitant to commit troops to any potential Ukrainian peacekeeping mission.

Norway

Oslo unveiled an ambitious 10-year defence plan in 2024 aimed at bolstering national security, which includes $60 billion in additional defence spending. To support this strategy, Norway intends to expand its armed forces by 50% by 2036. Despite its respected universal conscription system, Oslo has long struggled to convert conscripts into long-term professional soldiers—a problem amplified by its relatively small population of 5.6 million. The article notes that these demographic limitations could strain Norway’s ability to sustain an enhanced NATO defence posture.

Italy

Rome faces significant personnel shortages as well. Last year, Italy’s Chief of Defence Staff declared that the country’s 165,000-strong force was “absolutely undersized” and that anything below 170,000 was “below the level of survival.” Unlike Germany and Norway, however, Italy’s recruitment issue has a clearer solution. Military salaries lag far behind those in the private sector and civilian government, discouraging enlistment. Combined with Italy’s geographic distance from Russia, this results in weak public motivation to serve—only 16% of Italians say they would fight for their country.

These challenges are not limited to Europe. The United States faces similar demographic pressures, albeit for different reasons, and has already adapted its recruitment strategies to maintain force levels. Its experience offers lessons that could help NATO allies convert defence spending into real military capability.

US services exceeded their 2024 recruitment goals through focused leadership, innovative measures such as pre-boot camp training, and pragmatic policy reforms—including relaxed tattoo rules, permission of retests for THC (Cannabis) ingredients, and modernized body composition standards.

The article suggests that European allies could adopt comparable approaches while tailoring them to their specific circumstances, such as Germany’s cultural aversion to military service and Italy’s uncompetitive pay. While the alliance’s landmark pledge to spend 5% of GDP on defence is essential, it will remain insufficient without enough trained personnel to operate NATO’s increasingly sophisticated equipment.

By Nazrin Sadigova