Ankara Locked Down, NATO Holds Its Breath Facing Trump

Introduction: a capital under lockdown to save an alliance

A city of six million turned into a fortress

Dear reader, let me describe what Ankara has become this week. A capital of nearly six million people placed under lockdown, where tens of thousands of police officers have been deployed, where air defenses are on maximum alert, where public gatherings, concerts, and even graduation ceremonies have been flatly banned. This is not paranoia. It is proof, written in concrete and checkpoints, that the NATO summit set for July 7-8, 2026 is playing for stakes that go far beyond courtesy diplomacy.

More than 200 people suspected of ties to extremist groups, including the Islamic State, were arrested even before the summit opened, according to Turkish authorities. Turkey even inaugurated a new VIP airport, converted from a former military airfield, to receive heads of state. Non-essential state employees were sent on leave to ease congestion in the city. This deployment is not just about security — it is a political message aimed at every member of the Alliance, and especially at one man: Donald Trump.

Why this letter, and why now

I am writing you this open letter because this summit is unlike any other. It is being held while Trump has repeatedly threatened to pull the United States back from its commitments to the Atlantic Alliance, and while Washington has already reduced the forces it assigns to NATO's defense plans — carriers, refueling aircraft, fighters, drones. The American president has even posted on Truth Social that the United States was spending money to protect NATO members "without getting a thing in return." That is the climate in which 32 heads of state now find themselves in Ankara, hosted by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

So I address you directly, leaders gathered in this high-security capital: the West does not have the luxury of fracturing right now. Russia is watching. China is watching. Iran and North Korea are watching. Every crack of division within NATO is a silent invitation to those who dream of seeing the Western order crumble.

The Trump-Europe rift: Iran, Greenland, and fractured personal ties

A war on Iran that rattled the world economy without consultation

Mister President Trump, allow me to speak to you frankly. Your war against Iran, waged without genuine consultation of European allies, upended the global economy and left deep diplomatic scars. According to Reuters, this operation broke personal ties you had carefully cultivated with leaders like Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and outgoing British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. These allies, historically close to Washington, now find themselves managing the anger of their own publics, largely hostile to this war.

A European diplomat quoted by Reuters sums up the situation in a line that will stick: "The Alliance is alive and well, but a bit bruised." Another senior NATO diplomat adds, with dry humor, that if tensions boil over at the summit, there is always "the ultimate marriage counselor," Secretary General Mark Rutte, to smooth things out.

Greenland, an explosive file between allies

And then there is Greenland. Your repeated threats to seize this territory belonging to Denmark — a founding NATO ally — are not, in European eyes, mere rhetorical provocation. It is a signal that even a member's territorial sovereignty can be called into question by its own protector. How can Ukraine be asked to resist Russia's territorial appetite if one of NATO's own pillars is eyeing an ally's territory?

Washington has also launched a six-month review of its military presence in Europe, and has already pulled certain assets from the force posture assigned to NATO. These unilateral decisions are fueling a concern that no longer stays confined to diplomatic circles: it now shows up in polling and in parliamentary debates across the continent.

The numbers that speak: 570 billion dollars and the 3.5% target

A historic rise in European defense budgets

Here are the numbers, dear readers, and they are considerable. According to Mark Rutte, NATO's European members and Canada spent 90 billion dollars more on defense in 2025 than the year before. The total now exceeds 570 billion dollars. These are not abstract accounting figures: they are tanks, air defense systems, munitions, soldiers' salaries, investments in Europe's defense industry.

At last year's The Hague summit, NATO leaders committed to raising core defense spending — weapons and troops — to 3.5% of GDP by 2035, up from a previous target of just 2%. An additional 1.5% of GDP is also earmarked for broader defense-related investments, including cybersecurity. It is a change of scale that would have been unthinkable a decade ago.

Tens of billions in arms contracts at stake in Ankara

Rutte said this week's summit would focus on turning these added investments into "genuinely combat-ready capabilities," with a significant ramp-up of defense industries. Arms contracts worth tens of billions of dollars are expected to be signed in Ankara. The message is clear: Europeans want to show, with hard numbers, that they are carrying their share of the burden — and in doing so, strip Trump of his favorite argument against the Alliance.

Rutte himself stressed the point with an almost diplomatic firmness: "NATO is, and will always be, a transatlantic alliance, but we need to rebalance it for the better." He added that European allies and Canada, working closely with the United States, are taking on growing responsibility for Europe's conventional defense.

Zelensky at the table, Ukraine still front and center

A dinner at Erdogan's, a symbol of support that isn't fading

Despite all the internal tensions I have just described, one thing has not moved: the declared support for Ukraine. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky will attend a dinner hosted by Turkish President Erdogan on the sidelines of the summit. NATO leaders are expected to reaffirm their commitment to keep funding the weapons Ukraine needs to resist the Russian invasion. This is a signal I want to underline forcefully: even weakened, even "bruised" in one European diplomat's words, the Alliance is not letting go of Kyiv.

This dinner is not a minor protocol gesture. It is about physically placing Zelensky within the summit's setting, keeping him visible to heads of state who must each manage their own public opinion and, at times, pressure to scale back military aid. Ukraine's presence in Ankara is a reminder that the war in Eastern Europe remains the Alliance's number one strategic priority, no matter the egos and transatlantic tensions.

Erdogan, strategic host and Trump's direct counterpart

The choice of Ankara as host city is no accident. Turkey, often seen as an "odd case" within NATO because of its ambiguous relations with Moscow and its past purchases of Russian S-400 systems, is using this occasion to show its irreplaceable strategic worth. Erdogan will also hold direct bilateral talks with Trump on the sidelines of the summit — a meeting worth watching closely, given both men's habit of turning one-on-ones into geopolitical television moments.

This host position gives Turkey considerable diplomatic leverage. Ankara can present itself simultaneously as a reliable NATO partner and as a potential bridge to actors the West struggles to approach directly. It is a balancing act Turkish diplomacy has mastered for decades.

The Hague precedent: hoping for a calmer remake

When Trump played along with unity

To understand the anxiety surrounding this summit, it helps to recall what happened last year in The Hague. Trump had reaffirmed the United States' commitment to the 32-member alliance and to its mutual defense pact, Article 5. He even complimented his counterparts. That moment was seen, at the time, as a collective relief: the transatlantic relationship seemed to hold despite the American president's repeated criticism.

European officials are now hoping for a similar scenario in Ankara. One senior NATO diplomat says they are "optimistic that it won't happen" — referring to a possible Trump outburst — "because I think the leaders know what is at stake." That is a bet, not a certainty.

The risk of a derailment amid the Iran war

But that bet rests on a fragile balance. According to Reuters, the conflict with Iran could overshadow the summit if fighting intensifies again, or if Trump decides to vent his frustration at Europeans he views as insufficiently committed to American military operations. The American president has reportedly hinted that this European reluctance could justify Washington not fully honoring its commitment to defend an ally under attack — an implicit, but chilling, challenge to Article 5 itself.

NATO officials nonetheless point out that the vast majority of allies honored their commitments by allowing the United States to use their airspace and bases on their territory during the Iran campaign — even though that war remained deeply unpopular with European public opinion.

Ankara's security posture, a mirror of an anxious era

Measures that speak to the scale of the perceived threat

Let's pause for a moment on the security setup itself, because it says a lot about the era we are living in. Several major roads, the airports, the presidential complex hosting the summit, and the hotels housing delegations are all under strict access control. The Turkish newspaper Cumhuriyet even reported that the facades of homes along the route from the airport to downtown were repainted as part of an urban beautification campaign — an almost theatrical detail that shows just how much this summit is also a showcase.

On Saturday, June 27, just days before the summit opened, an anti-NATO demonstration took place in Istanbul, where protesters chanted slogans and held up signs. This kind of popular dissent is a reminder that support for NATO is not unanimous within Turkish society itself, despite the government's official stance.

A VIP airport that will stay closed to the public

Another striking detail: the new Ankara airport, expanded from a former military airfield with runways widened specifically for this summit, is expected to remain a VIP airport even after the event, never serving the general public. It is an infrastructure investment directly tied to the diplomatic prestige Turkey draws from its host role — a role it clearly intends to exploit well beyond these two days in July.

These security restrictions will severely disrupt daily life in a city of nearly six million people. Non-essential state employees have been given leave to reduce urban congestion, and public gatherings of any kind have been banned for the duration of the summit.

What the West risks losing if unity cracks

Collective deterrence as a shield against Moscow, Beijing, and Tehran

Dear leaders gathered in Ankara, I will tell you plainly: every visible crack in your unity is a gift to Vladimir Putin. Russia continues its invasion of Ukraine, and it watches for the slightest sign of Western weakness to recalibrate its territorial ambitions. China, for its part, watches closely how the West manages its own internal tensions, potentially seeing in it a model — or a cautionary tale — for its own strategy toward Taiwan.

Iran and North Korea round out this picture of threats the West must confront with a unified posture. None of these actors benefits more from a weakened NATO than these four regimes, which, together or separately, seek to reshape the international order to their advantage.

Why Article 5's credibility is not up for negotiation

Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty — the mutual defense clause — has been the cornerstone of all Western deterrence since 1949. If even the slightest doubt creeps in about the United States' genuine will to honor this commitment, the entire European security architecture becomes fragile. Trump's comments suggesting that European reluctance to further support the operation in Iran could justify loosening this commitment are, in my view, one of the most dangerous signals sent in years.

That is precisely why the tens of billions of dollars in arms contracts and the concrete European military spending commitments announced in Ankara are not mere accounting symbols. They are a genuine attempt to rebuild a collective credibility shaken by months of erratic rhetoric.

Europe's responsibility: paying up to be taken seriously

Breaking free of strategic dependence on Washington

It has to be said honestly: for decades, several European countries underinvested in their own defense, counting on the American umbrella to fill the gaps. That era is coming to an end, whether European capitals like it or not. The figures cited by Rutte — a 90-billion-dollar increase in a single year, more than 570 billion in total — show a real shift in mindset, not just rhetoric.

But money alone is not enough. Rutte stressed the need to turn these investments into "genuinely combat-ready capabilities" and to massively scale up European defense industries. That means munitions factories running at full capacity, supply chains less dependent on outside suppliers, and an industrial base able to sustain a prolonged war effort if needed.

Canada, a quiet but committed partner

It is worth noting that Canada is consistently grouped with European members in NATO's defense spending tallies, even though it is not geographically European. Ottawa has also increased its contribution, joining this broader push toward collective accountability against Russia. It is a reminder that Western solidarity extends beyond the European continent alone and includes all democracies committed to a rules-based international order.

This gradual step-up, if it holds beyond the Ankara summit, could eventually reduce excessive dependence on Washington's unilateral decisions — whether they come from Trump or any future American president.

The symbolic weight of choosing Ankara as host capital

Turkey, a complex but geographically indispensable ally

Turkey's geographic position — straddling Europe, the Middle East, and the Black Sea region — makes it an ally whose strategic value is hard to dispute, even when its domestic political choices or its relations with Moscow draw criticism within NATO. Hosting this summit is a way for Ankara to remind its Western partners that it remains an indispensable pillar of the regional security architecture.

This position also lets it play an intermediary role on the Ukraine file, having previously hosted talks between Kyiv and Moscow. Zelensky's presence at the dinner hosted by Erdogan fits into this diplomatic continuity.

A credibility test for Erdogan himself

For Erdogan, this summit is also a personal test. Successfully orchestrating a gathering without major incident, while holding substantive bilateral talks with Trump, would strengthen his stature as an indispensable regional mediator. A misstep, conversely, would expose the limits of Turkish influence within an Alliance where, in the eyes of several Western partners, it remains a member whose loyalty is sometimes seen as ambiguous.

The bet is risky, but the stakes go far beyond Turkey itself: the cohesion of NATO's entire southeastern flank against Russia partly hinges on whether this summit succeeds or fails.

What Trump needs to hear, once and for all

A direct message to the American president

Mister President, I am addressing you directly in this open letter because the moment demands it. Europeans have heard your criticism. They have begun answering it with concrete numbers: a 90-billion-dollar annual increase, more than 570 billion in total, a target of 3.5% of GDP by 2035. That is not nothing. It is a real, measurable, verifiable effort.

What I ask of you, in the name of everyone who still believes in the strength of a united West, is to recognize this effort without downplaying it, and to stop turning every summit into an occasion to sow doubt about the fundamental American commitment to Article 5. You knew how to play the unifying leader at The Hague. Ankara can be a chance to do it again.

A call for collective responsibility

And to you, European leaders, I say this: do not rely solely on American goodwill. Keep investing, keep building your own defense industrial capabilities, keep supporting Ukraine relentlessly. History will not forgive an Alliance that collapsed for lack of collective courage at the exact moment Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea were waiting for that moment of weakness.

Ankara, with its thousands of police officers and its air defenses on alert, may be the perfect metaphor for our era: an Alliance that must protect itself from itself almost as much as from its external enemies, while knowing its survival depends on staying united against them.

The troubling silence over what comes after the summit

No guarantee of continuity beyond July 2026

What troubles me, as I prepare this letter, is the lack of concrete guarantees about what happens after this summit. The commitments made in Ankara — whether on defense spending, continued support for Ukraine, or the reaffirmation of Article 5 — rest largely on the political good faith of leaders whose priorities can change overnight, particularly in Trump's case, whose reversals have become a recognized feature of his governing style.

The six-month review Washington launched into its military presence in Europe will come due in the months following this summit. The results of that review could either confirm the commitments made in Ankara or brutally contradict them. No one, at this stage, can predict which of these two scenarios will play out.

What I cannot state with certainty

I must be honest with you: I do not know exactly how this gathering will unfold. I do not know whether Trump will choose the conciliatory tone of The Hague or the unpredictability that has marked other moments of his presidency. No reliable source can predict with certainty the outcome of these two days. What I can affirm, however, are the verified facts: the spending figures, the security measures, the documented tensions over Iran and Greenland, and Zelensky's confirmed presence at the dinner hosted by Erdogan.

It is this factual caution that must guide our reading of geopolitical news, even — especially — when the stakes matter this much to us.

The possible shockwave through Western public opinion

War fatigue gaining ground

We also need to talk about public opinion, because it deeply shapes the room to maneuver for the leaders gathered in Ankara. The war on Iran was, according to available reporting, deeply unpopular in Europe, and many European leaders did not support this American intervention. If this war fatigue spreads to the Ukraine file, it could gradually erode the political will to maintain high levels of aid to Kyiv, despite official commitments reaffirmed at every summit.

European governments are thus walking a tightrope: maintaining a firm rhetoric of support for Ukraine and toughness toward Russia, while managing a public opinion increasingly weary of the economic and human costs tied to these prolonged commitments.

The role of media and citizen vigilance

This is where the work of verification and context, like what I try to do in this letter, becomes fully meaningful. It is easy to give in to either surface-level diplomatic euphoria or total cynicism toward international summits. The truth, as is often the case, lies in the careful examination of numbers, official statements, and the concrete actions that will — or will not — follow the fine words spoken in Ankara.

I invite you, dear readers, to follow the coming weeks with the same rigor: which arms contracts actually get signed, which weapons deliveries to Ukraine are actually honored, and whether the promised 3.5% of GDP for 2035 translates into a credible budget trajectory starting this year.

Why this letter is also addressed to you, Western reader

You are not a mere spectator to this story

I close this letter by speaking directly to you, reading from home, far from Ankara's checkpoints and hushed negotiating rooms. This summit concerns you directly, whether you live in Quebec, France, Belgium, or elsewhere in the Western world. The decisions made — or avoided — in Ankara will partly determine the level of collective security you enjoy in the years ahead, as well as the price you will pay, directly or indirectly, for that security.

The taxes that fund defense budgets, the energy prices affected by tensions with Iran and Russia, overall economic stability — all of it stems, in part, from the strength or fragility of Western unity that this summit must demonstrate.

Staying vigilant without giving in to fatalism

I am not asking you to sink into permanent geopolitical anxiety. I am simply asking you to stay informed, to question simplistic narratives — whether they come from those who downplay transatlantic tensions or those who prematurely announce NATO's collapse. Reality, as always, is more nuanced, slower moving, and more dependent on concrete choices than on spectacular declarations.

Ankara will be a test. Not the last one, not the only one, but a revealing test of the direction the West is taking at a pivotal moment in its recent history.

The Ukrainian precedent: what Kyiv concretely expects from Ankara

Weapons deliveries, not just promises

For the Ukrainian government, this summit is not measured in speeches but in concrete deliveries. Air defense systems, artillery munitions, and armored vehicles promised at previous summits do not always arrive at the announced pace, and Kyiv knows this better than anyone after more than four years of full-scale Russian invasion. Zelensky's presence at the dinner hosted by Erdogan is precisely meant to maintain the political pressure needed for financial commitments to translate into equipment delivered to the front.

The tens of billions of dollars in arms contracts announced in Ankara will not all directly benefit Ukraine, but they indirectly strengthen the production capacity of the Western defense industry, which in turn feeds the stockpiles available for Kyiv. It is an indirect but real link between broader European rearmament and Ukraine's capacity to resist on the ground.

Fear of a gradual abandonment if Washington pulls back

Kyiv's greatest fear, shared by several European capitals, remains a gradual American withdrawal that would leave Europe alone to finance a long war. The already-announced reductions in American military assets assigned to NATO — carriers, refuelers, fighters, drones — feed this concern, even though they do not directly involve aid to Ukraine.

That is why the European rearmament figures, impressive as they are, must be read with this question in mind: is Europe truly capable of picking up the slack if Washington further reduces its commitment in the months following this summit? The answer, at this stage, remains uncertain.

Conclusion: a test summit for the West's future

What to watch for after July 8

As I close this letter, I take away three factual elements that should guide our reading of the coming weeks. First, the defense spending figures announced — a 90-billion-dollar annual increase, more than 570 billion in total, a target of 3.5% of GDP by 2035 — will need to translate into concrete, verifiable budget commitments in every member country. Second, Zelensky's presence at the dinner hosted by Erdogan and the promises of continued weapons funding for Ukraine must be followed by actual deliveries. Third, the relationship between Trump and his European counterparts, particularly regarding Greenland and the Iran file, will determine whether Ankara becomes a summit of reconciliation or merely a temporary truce before new tensions.

The spectacular security apparatus deployed by Turkey will remain, whatever happens, the most striking visual symbol of this week: an Alliance that must barricade itself to protect its own unity as much as to protect itself from outside adversaries.

Measured hope, not certainty

I cannot promise you this summit will durably resolve transatlantic tensions. No one honestly can. But I can tell you that the concrete efforts made by Europeans, the verifiable rearmament figures, and Ukraine's continued place in NATO's stated priorities are reasonable grounds for measured hope — not euphoria, but cautious hope grounded in facts rather than promises.

The West has weathered internal crises worse than this one and come out stronger. Nothing guarantees the same will happen this time. But recent history teaches us that collective resilience, when fed by concrete commitments rather than slogans, usually wins out over division in the end.

By Maxime Marquette, columnist

Columnist's transparency note

Who I am and my acknowledged biases

I sign this open letter as a columnist and analyst, not as a journalist claiming neutrality. My biases are declared: I believe the West must remain at the center of the international order, I support Ukraine without reservation against the Russian invasion, and I view China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea as structural threats to Western security. On Trump, my treatment varies by subject: I acknowledge his efforts on military posture and on pressuring allies to raise their spending, but I remain critical of his unilateral methods and his threats against allies like Denmark.

I do not claim to be a neutral observer of this Alliance, whose solidity I want to see preserved. This letter is written with that conviction as its backdrop, while relying strictly on verified, sourced facts.

What I don't know, and my method

I do not know exactly how the bilateral meeting between Erdogan and Trump will unfold, nor whether tensions over Iran and Greenland will ease or worsen during this summit. No source consulted allows me to settle this question with certainty, and I am careful not to speculate beyond what the reported facts allow me to state. My method is to cross-reference reliable primary and secondary sources, to clearly distinguish verified facts from interpretation, and to explicitly flag my areas of uncertainty rather than hide them behind false confidence.

This letter draws on press reports from the days immediately before and after the summit's opening, as well as public statements directly attributed to identified officials, such as Mark Rutte, and diplomats quoted anonymously by news agencies.

Sources

Primary sources

Turkey tightens security and showcases strength ahead of NATO summit — AJC, July 1, 2026

Turkiye locks down Ankara for high-stakes NATO summit — India Today, July 1, 2026

Secondary sources

NATO leaders to gather in Ankara, aiming to smooth over tensions with Trump — Reuters, July 3, 2026

The Guardian International — ongoing NATO coverage

Al Jazeera — Ukraine-Russia crisis file

Foreign Policy — Western foreign policy analysis