Hell, the screwed up bit about that is that most of them are meeting the bloody guideline -- there's only five members that haven't seen an increase in real spending since 2014, and only four since 2015 (and there's not complete overlap there, either).* The goddamn politicians aren't trying to hold someone to a guideline they're failing to meet, they're trying to hold them to a guideline that doesn't exist.
*Well, not counting the US, that's over that 2% but has dropped real spending more than those four/five combined, if I'm adding right with this headache going.
E: Actually, the provision is for folks under the 2% contribution, really. Means at least one of those four/five mentioned don't count, since it's estonia and they're over the 2%. Greece is in there, too, now that I double check.
E2: Well, if they meet the 20% equipment expenditure thing, too. Which they don't, now that I check. Most of the members don't meet that one, and there doesn't look to be much rhyme or reason to which ones, heh. Though it does look like most of the ones with the allocation below that have been moving towards pretty well since 2014 -- there's like three or four that are down since then, with a few others up since '14 but down since '15. Either way, again, most of NATO's moving in the direction agreed on, there.