Who's Paid - An assessment of allies' contributions to the US

	A	B	C	D	E	F
1	Payment score components	Rationale	Evaluation metric	Scoring Rubric	Percentage of payment score (adjustable, automatically updates rankings)	A note about component weightings The component weightings can be adjusted within reason (i.e. no component accounts for more than 50% or less than 10% of the overall payment score), but as demonstrated in the "various weightings tab," the weightings do not substantially alter the "payment score" rankings. Correspondingly, for simplicity sake, the payment score components are given equal weightings (i.e. 20-20-20-20-20)
2	Has the ally met its defense spending targets over the lifetime of the alliance?	Washington expects its allies to develop and maintain properly-funded independent military capabilities - which reduces the burdens of guaranteeing their security (and creates a pool of capable potential partners for other US-led coalitions). Consistently meeting Washington's 2% of GDP defense spending target also demonstrates domestic political resolve that enhances the alliance's deterrent potential.	Total defense expenditure during alliance tenure, expressed as a percentage of GDP over the same period	Maximum points - Spending at least 2% of GDP on defense over the alliance's lifetime Partial points - Based on alliance lifetime defense spending relative to 2% threshold	20
3	Has the ally met its defense spending targets over the last decade?	Military capabilities atrophy without sufficient ongoing funding: correspondingly, recent defense spending provides insight into which allies have maintained the military capability and readiness that Washington values. It also provides insight into levels of domestic political resolve. By only considering lifetime alliance spending, for example, one would overlook the significant decline in NATO solidarity following the end of the Cold War (https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7272097248279191552/)	Average annual defense expenditure, expressed as a percentage of GDP, since 2015	Maximum points - Annual defense expenditures averaging at least 2% of GDP since 2015 Partial points - Based on average annual defense spending since 2015, relative to 2% threshold	20
4	How much American weaponry has the ally purchased?	Allied acquisitions of major US weapons are tantamount to direct payments to Washington: sales of existing systems and their associated maintenance programs create additional revenue and work experience for the American defense-industrial base; and cooperative development of new systems lowers per-unit acquisition costs. More generally, allied use of American arms also facilitates greater interoperability with US forces – thereby enhancing the alliance’s warfighting potential.	US arms purchases, expressed as a ratio of a state's relative shares of all US arms imports and global GDP while allied	Maximum points - 2:1 import-to-GDP ratio (indicative of highly concentrated investments in US arms) Partial points - Based on import-to-GDP ratio, relative to 2:1	20
5	Has the ally supported US-led combat coalitions?	Alliances are not wellsprings of guaranteed support: as inherently self-interested actors, allies can decline to render aid or even defect to opposing blocs. Correspondingly, "showing up" to support the US is important in and of itself. Substantively though, allied participation in US-led combat coalitions reduces Washington's operational costs/burdens and increases the conflict's international legitimation.	Level of participation in US-led combat coalitions while allied	Maximum points - Contributing frontline combat forces to each coalition Partial points - Partial points, based on relative contributions to each coalition Combat coalitions include - 5 US-led ground-wars (Korea, Vietnam, Persian Gulf, Afghanistan, and Iraq) - 5 US-led primarily air-wars (Iraqi No Fly Zones, Bosnia, Kosovo, Libya, and ISIS) 60 total points, awarded (relative to burden undertaken) as follows - 8 points for contributing frontline combat forces to ground-war coalitions - 4 points for contributing frontline combat forces to primarily air-war coalitions - 4 points for contributing supporting military units to ground-war coalitions - 2 points for contributing supporting military units to primarily air-war coalitions - 2 points for making significant financial contributions to ground-war coalitions - 1 point for making significant financial contributions to primarily air-war coalitions	20
6	Has the ally paid the blood price?	Allied personnel losses, incurred while furthering Washington’s security interests, demonstrate the highest form of alliance loyalty and burden-sharing.	Number of US-led coalition ground-wars with personnel losses while allied	Maximum points - Incurring service personnel losses within each US-led ground-war coalition Partial points - Based on the percentage of US-ground-war coalitions with service personnel losses	20
7
8	Dataset Citation Boone, George (2025). "Who's Paid - An assessment of allies' contributions to the US." https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1RPXHETBFr0V5E5ZBvxtDu2rdpzyLfKBoh5HobjZHp5A
9
10	Related research outputs Boone, George and Thomas Wilkins. "Some US allies contribute, some loaf. Here’s a numerical assessment." The Strategist (February 26, 2025). https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/some-us-allies-contribute-some-loaf-heres-a-numerical-assessment/ Boone, George. "For Trump, Australia is nothing like Canada." The Interpreter (February 25, 2025). https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/trump-australia-nothing-canada
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100