‘NATO Bank First Junked by France, Then Dropped by Germany and U.K.’

Sept. 17—That’s the title of an article in France’s main economic daily, Les Echos, dated Sept. 9. The NATO bank is a project proposed by former NATO officials as a means to rapidly assemble capital to invest in weapons production. Two officials are named: Robert Murray, former NATO executive and British officer, and Stuart Peach, former chairman of NATO’s Military Committee. The original plan for this bank apparently goes back to the first U.S. Trump administration, and was later also considered during the Biden administration.

The loot is quite huge for the banks participating. Taking into consideration that all NATO countries agreed at last June’s meeting to go from the present 2-3% of their GDP spent on military matters, to 5%, total defense spending is expected to increase by some $1.9 trillion.

So, what are they proposing? According to a MoneyVox article written with AFP March 7, which quotes Murray, the model for this bank—which they call “Defense, Security and Resilience Bank,” or DSRB—is that of “a multilateral bank, in the image of the European Investment Bank which would be funded, in part by the stock-holding states, and the idea is to call upon both European and American capital.”

How would it function? Since getting loans for strategic equipment is often an uphill battle for SMEs, the DSRB would offer guarantees to commercial banks. SMEs will then use these guarantees to get long-term credit on more favorable terms. At the same time, the institution would issue bonds with a AAA rating. This level of credit quality will give member states access to a new financing channel. Rather than relying solely on sovereign borrowing, they will be able to raise funds by placing these securities with investors around the world.

And which banks are already online to get parts of this pie? JPMorgan Chase, Commerzbank, ING Group, RBC Capital Markets, and Landesbank Baden-Württemberg. Robert Murray, envisages raising some $135 billion. The sum would be advanced by the state stockholders and institutional partners. “But only a fraction of this capital—between 10 and 20%—would actually be paid in cash, with the rest being callable if needed, which is standard practice in the sector,” Robert Murray told AFP.

In reality it means building yet another huge bubble for bankers to loot, this time on a thriving war economy. The only problem is that none of the major European countries want to go ahead with the scheme.