I'll just try to answer a little bit on that, and I'm sure Rob will have something to say.
I think one of the things we have to do is to be careful about being too self-congratulatory. I actually agree with my two colleagues that our contributions are very good. They're very effective—they're usually not without caveats—but we have to stop saying that the only reason we don't go to 2% is because we're so good. If other countries want to tell us that we're good, I think that's great. I think we continue to be excellent, but I was told by some of my colleagues when I was the NSA, “Enough is enough. We know you're good. We just want you to do a bit more.”
Having said that, I absolutely agree that we need a new formula in NATO that takes into account mobility, willingness, civilian contributions, and military contributions. There have been efforts over the year—Rob probably knows more about it than I do—to modify the formula.
To your point, a lot of people don't want to hear about it. They're worried and they want more of a contribution. I think the key for us is to demonstrate that while we're not at 2%, the graph line is going up, and then make a variety of other arguments.