In Ankara, European leaders were eager to stress that they have delivered on their spending pledges since The Hague and that the Europeanisation of NATO is in full swing: European and Canadian allies have, on aggregate, already reached 4% of GDP in defence investments.[1] In this regard, an op-ed by EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and NATO Secretary-General, Mark Rutte, read as a strong signal of the Europeanisation of NATO, with particular emphasis on the defence industry.[2] Turkey being the host country used the summit as an opportunity not only to position itself as a central security-political actor but also to stress that the Europeanisation of NATO should not be synonymous with an EU-only defence project excluding non-EU allies like itself. The good personal relationship of the Turkish President, Recep Erdoğan with Trump has been interpreted as decisive in ensuring the summit's smooth running. Although Turkey has been at times a difficult NATO partner, for instance on the Cyprus conflict or its maintained relationship with Russia, European allies chose a pragmatic approach towards Ankara within the NATO framework.
In the lead to the summit, all efforts were on placating US-President Donald Trump, and as such ensuring a smooth sailing of the summit. Recent announcements from the US administration added further uncertainty: at the NATO Defence Ministers' meeting in Brussels on 18 June, Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth's remarks[3] and the ongoing global posture review pointed to a structural shift in US capabilities – coined as “NATO 3.0”. Even if concrete numbers remained elusive, this announcement was accompanied by alongside threats to reduce US contributions to common funding should other allies fail to meet their financial obligations. In addition, Greenland once again emerged a nervous undercurrent: on the day of the summit, Trump reiterated his call for US control over the territory and tied it to US military support, threatening to withdraw “all of our” soldiers from Europe - prompting pushback on the doorstep from Denmark and its Nordic-Baltic allies. among others.
Outcome of the summit[4]
The Ankara summit's central goal was to project unity, and the summit declaration delivers on that expectation, describing the commitment to Article 5 as “ironclad”. This sense of unity extends to solidarity and collective defence more broadly. Particularly notable is the declaration's emphasis on the 360-degree approach - a principle European allies have long championed - which also confirms expectations that, with Turkey as host, the alliance's Southern flank would receive greater attention and emphasis. The declaration further, as expected, identifies Russia unambiguously as the long-term threat, with terrorism named second.
On defence spending, NATO allies acknowledged that they are living up to the commitments made in The Hague, praising an increase in defence investment of over $139 billion. As a next logical step, allies announced more than $50 billion in new procurements, and in particular sought to facilitate cross-national industry cooperation to spur innovation. Some notable defence industry deals from Ankara include: joint underwater mine acquisition by Finland, Germany, Denmark, Lithuania, and Norway, alongside a twelve-ally project on defence-critical raw materials aimed at strengthening supply chain resilience. NATO also launched the "NATO Front Door for Industry" to simplify company access to procurement, and "NATO Engine" to expand and coordinate industrial production capacity across borders. A further initiative seeks to mobilise private capital for defence, an effort already welcomed by several major banks.[5]
Ahead of the summit, the most high-profile deal, however, was Canada's order of 12 submarines from the German manufacturer ThyssenKrupp in a joint partnership with Norway. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz described the deal as a sign of allies “making NATO more European, so that it stays transatlantic”. Canada also unveiled a new “Defence, Security and Resilience Bank” with nine founding members[6], part of its broader push for an “alliance of middle powers”. While this strengthens defence investment and ultimately benefits NATO as a whole, it is not without reservations, as it may compete with other initiatives -for instance, the Multilateral Defence Mechanism (MDM) led by the UK, the Netherlands, and Finland.
The summit also exposed continuing friction over the EU's “Buy European” approach. Secretary-General Rutte used the occasion to reframe this as "Made in NATO," arguing there was enough money and industrial capacity for both sides of the Atlantic - a response to recurring US criticism that Europeans should continue to buy US weapons systems. A NATO official struck a more cautious note on European-only initiatives, saying the alliance welcomed them but wanted them to remain “as inclusive as possible”[7].
"A Stronger Europe in a Stronger NATO" is the term the declaration coins for the first time, potentially superseding the frequently used phrases "Europeanisation of NATO" or "European pillar within NATO." This reframing can also be read as a compromise vis-à-vis Turkey, which, as host, had been eager to stress that the Europeanisation of NATO should not become synonymous with an EU-led process that excludes non-EU allies. Notably, Canada is explicitly included in the group of European allies assuming greater responsibility, while the US is instead framed as a cooperation partner in this process. This represents a clear next step from the NATO summit in The Hague towards greater emancipation for European allies and a diminishing operational role for the US.
The declaration also sets out a clear ambition to modernise the alliance. Beyond nuclear and conventional capabilities, it explicitly includes space, cyber, cutting-edge technologies, artificial intelligence tools, and even a transatlantic warfighting cloud. In doing so, NATO allies articulate a shared vision of a “NATO 3.0”- not an alliance in decline due to reduced US engagement, but one looking confidently towards the future. This emphasis on emerging technologies underscores that NATO is consciously grappling with the changing character of future conflict and warfighting.
For the first time, the declaration recognised Ukraine as a contributor to transatlantic security due to Kyiv's leading role in drone warfare, defence innovation and manufacturing.
The Ankara summit aimed to place Western support for Ukraine on a more sustainable footing via a multi-annual pledge of 70 billion euro in “military equipment, assistance and training” for 2026 and undertook to sustain "at least equivalent levels" in 2027. This commitment was shared among 31 allies since the US halted direct military supported to Ukraine, with most of the funding already identified. The fact that Europeans and Canadians finance the lion share of security assistance to Ukraine was explicitly acknowledged. As the head of Ukraine's mission to NATO, Alyona Gertmanchuk noted, allies cannot offer security guarantees at present but instead can offer "financial guarantees."[8] The question of Ukrainian NATO membership was not addressed.
The most pressing operational need remains air defence against Russian ballistic missile strikes: Kyiv is seeking additional PAC-3 (Patriot) interceptors through the PURL initiative, which US Ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker framed as a success story.[9] Remarkably, in a bilateral meeting between President Trump and Ukrainian President Zelenskyy, Trump signalled that the US will allow Ukraine the licensed production of Patriot interceptors.[10]
A new escalation in the US-Israeli war with Iran overshadowed the summit: following the leaders' dinner, Trump ordered US strikes on Iran in response to recent attacks on vessels in the Strait of Hormuz. While the declaration contained no stand-alone paragraph on Iran, the topic was addressed in a paragraph describing the deteriorating security environment marked by “strategic competition, pervasive instability, hybrid threats and recurrent shocks”. The communique reaffirmed that Iran must never acquire a nuclear weapon and for respect of the freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. The Iran war is closely tied to the war in Ukraine, given the shared demand for the same air-defence interceptors for the Patriot system.
What does this mean?
Militarily, NATO is in its best stage in a very long time, but the summit revealed as much through what the declaration left out: China, and Ukrainian NATO membership - which is off the table for the time being. A clear fault line emerged on the defence-industrial dimension: Made in NATO vs Buy European. it also became clear the summit was "all about deals" meant to placate Trump. On implementing the pledges made in The Hague, Chancellor Friedrich Merz summed up the European stance, "We have delivered," adding that " “As of today, NATO is more European than ever. "[11]
Trade and tariff threats surprisingly entered the stage: Trump publicly demanded that all trade with Spain be cut over its insufficient defence spending, while Spain stayed calm and prepared a 15-page document setting out how it is complying with its commitments.
Iran took a bigger toll on the summit than anticipated: the dominant sentiment in the US administration remains disappointment, with European allies' reluctance to help secure the Strait of Hormuz perceived as a “stab in the back”. The Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda noted the recent US strikes might be part of a negotiation tactic.[12] Remarkably, in a direct exchange between Trump and Rutte, Rutte defended the European allies, recalling that they allowed the US to use their bases for the operations in the Middle East.[13]
Though absent from the declaration, the Greenland issue resurfaced throughout both summit days after the relative calm of recent months. Rutte tried to soothe President Trump by acknowledging shared concern over growing Russian and Chinese Arctic presence, pointing to the ongoing trilateral talks between the foreign ministers of Denmark, Greenland and the US and recalling the Davos understanding. Trump's claims that Russian and Chinese vessels threaten Greenland are not supported by evidence. The real security concern, Norwegian Defence Minister Tore Sandvik argued, lies further east: securing the so-called Bear Gap between the Norwegian mainland and Svalbard, the strategic chokepoint through which Russian submarines pass from the Kola Peninsula to reach Greenland and the North Atlantic.
The wording on Russia is again notably softer than the 2024 Washington summit's "most significant and direct threat." Secretary General Rutte framed the higher European and Canadian spending as both a fair burden-shifting and a response to this enduring threat, telling Moscow that “this Alliance will defend every inch of our territory. So, don't fool with us.[14] The remark can be read against Russia's growing hybrid threats below the threshold of warfare, which the declaration itself cites among the features of the altered security environment.
While Rutte confirmed that the next summit will take place in Albania, timing is yet to be confirmed. However, this is not stated in the summit’s declaration – possibly because Albania has not reached 2% defence spending yet.
Renewed momentum in Ankara…
The Ankara summit succeeded in projecting unity and can genuinely be read as a positive continuation of The Hague: the progress on defence spending achieved within a single year has been substantial. Burden-shifting is now visibly underway, reinforced by the agreements reached at the Defence Industry Summit. Most importantly, allies have managed to craft a positive new narrative around "NATO 3.0" — one that does not mourn diminishing US engagement but instead celebrates a stronger European contribution to the alliance.
Although there was some friction and a discontented tone on the sidelines of the summit, particularly from the US administration, this was largely theatre for external consumption; unity and constructive discussion dominated the closed-door sessions among leaders. Greenland, Iran, and Trump's threats against Spain were notably absent from the agenda in the room. Trump was even quoted as saying "love is in the air" at the close of the leaders' discussions. The impression Ankara leaves behind, then, is this: despite the drama staged for outside observers, there is genuine harmony and strong unity among allies. Where some may have doubted Washington's commitment after The Hague, few doubt it now.
The fact that the alliance — not least thanks to Mark Rutte's role as "Trump whisperer" — managed to contain the noise on the sidelines while drawing on its core unity to emerge with a coherent, forward-looking narrative and tangible industrial progress, speaks to NATO's resilience. Ankara has shown that the alliance retains the ability to focus on its core business and renew its momentum.
[1] Hague and that the Europeanisation of NATO is in full swing: European and Canadian allies have, on aggregate, already reached 4% of GDP in defence investments.
[2] What Europe and NATO must do to be ready for war
[3] Remarks by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth at the 2026 NATO Defense Ministerial in Brussels (As Delivered) > U.S. Department of War > Transcript | U.S. Department of War
[4] The Ankara Summit Declaration | NATO Official text
[5] News
[6] Albania, Belgium, Greece, Latvia, Luxembourg, Romania, Turkey and Ukraine
[7] Rutte’s ‘Made in NATO’ weapons push collides with EU’s ‘Buy European’ drive – POLITICO
[8] Ukraine set to gain new status as NATO allies unveil military pledge in Ankara | Euractiv
[9] Ukraine set to gain new status as NATO allies unveil military pledge in Ankara | Euractiv
[10] Trump says US will give Patriot missile license to Ukraine | Reuters
[11] LIVE: NATO allies gear up for defence talks on day two of Ankara summit | Euractiv
[12] LIVE: NATO allies gear up for defence talks on day two of Ankara summit | Euractiv
[13] Remarks by the NATO Secretary General and the President of the United States | NATO Video
[14] Doorstep statement | NATO Transcript
Über diese Reihe
