# NATO finally calls Russia the threat it is > It took more than four years of war in Ukraine for NATO to finally decide to put in writing what everyone already - Author: Maxime Marquette - Publisher: MadMax (https://mad-max.co) - Section: Note - Published: 2026-07-05 - Canonical URL: https://mad-max.co/en/article/l-otan-designe-enfin-la-russie-comme-la-menace-qu-elle-est ## Introduction: an admission that comes late, but comes ### A declaration that changes the vocabulary It took more than four years of war in **Ukraine** for **NATO** to finally decide to put in writing what everyone already knew. According to the final declaration of the **Ankara summit**, approved by ambassadors from the **32 member countries** around July 3, 2026, **Russia** will be formally designated as representing **"a long-term threat to Euro-Atlantic security and stability,"** reports **Pravda Ukraine**. This is not a semantic detail. In the **hushed** world of diplomatic communiqués, every word is **weighed**, negotiated, sometimes wrestled out through hard bargaining. The fact that the Alliance finally acknowledges, in an official text, that **Vladimir Putin** does not represent a passing accident but a structural and lasting threat marks a shift in tone that **Eastern capitals** have been demanding for years. ### Ankara, Turkey's second summit in twenty years The choice of **Ankara** as host of the **36th NATO summit**, on July 7 and 8, 2026, is no accident. It's only the second time **Turkey** has hosted such an event since the Istanbul summit in 2004. Heads of state and government will meet at the **Beştepe** presidential complex, according to information reported by **Euronews**, in a context where Ankara has played a balancing act between Moscow and the West since the conflict began. The geographic symbolism matters. Holding this summit at the doorstep of the **Black Sea**, a few hundred kilometers from the fighting, sends a clear message to Russian leaders: **Western unity** has not dissolved with time, it has instead **hardened** around a tougher line. *I'll say it plainly: this declaration arrives with an inexcusable delay. We knew as early as 2022, and really as early as the 2014 annexation of Crimea, that Putin would not stop on his own. But belated clarity beats eternal naivety.* ## Article 5 reaffirmed without ambiguity ### A commitment described as "ironclad" The text approved by ambassadors reaffirms what **Reuters** calls an **"ironclad commitment"** to the collective defense provided for under **Article 5** of the Alliance's founding treaty. In practical terms, an attack against a **NATO member** remains considered an **attack against all**, **with no exception**, no nuance, no diplomatic escape hatch for anyone tempted to test Western solidarity. This rhetorical clarity counts double in the current climate. Since **Donald Trump's** return to the White House, several **European allies** had worried about possible American **strategic ambiguity**. Seeing Washington co-sign such a firm text on Article 5 is reassuring, at least on the military front. ### The message sent to Moscow NATO Secretary General **Mark Rutte** summed up the spirit of the summit by explaining, according to **Anadolu Agency**, that the goal is to turn **"commitments into concrete results."** He also cited a striking figure: Russia now devotes nearly **48% of its state budget** to military spending, a **colossal war effort** for an economy that remains smaller than the combined economies of **Belgium** and the **Netherlands**. Rutte deliberately hammers this contrast home: despite this crushing budgetary effort on the Russian side, NATO retains a clear military and economic edge. It's a **message of deterrence** as much as a message of confidence sent to Western public opinion, often **weary** after more than four years of war. *A reaffirmed Article 5 is good. An Article 5 respected in practice the day a Baltic state or Poland faces a direct provocation is another matter entirely. The real test hasn't happened yet, and I hope it never does.* ## The Ukrainian jackpot: 140 billion euros over two years ### Massive funding carried by the Europeans Beyond the words, there are the numbers, and they are considerable. According to **Pravda Ukraine**, NATO's European allies and **Canada** are committing to provide **70 billion euros a year** in military support to Ukraine, in 2026 and 2027, for a total of **140 billion euros** over two years, roughly equivalent to **80 billion US dollars**. It's worth noting that the **United States** does not appear in this specific envelope, which illustrates a **gradual rebalancing** of the financial burden toward Europe, a shift **Washington** has demanded for years and that the **Trump administration** has accelerated through diplomatic pressure. ### What exactly this sum covers This **amount** is not entirely made up of fresh money. It includes the defense portion of the European Union's **90-billion-euro loan**, of which **28.3 billion euros** are earmarked for 2026 alone, plus **bilateral commitments** made country by country. The final declaration, **Euronews** notes, is also expected to recognize Ukraine not merely as a recipient of Western aid, but as a genuine **security provider** for its allies, notably thanks to its **recognized expertise** in drones. *Kyiv moving from geopolitical beggar to respected technology partner may be the most important transformation of this war. Ukraine no longer just asks, it teaches. And that changes everything in the **diplomatic balance of power**.* ## Trump, an unpredictable but present ally ### Real tensions before the summit It would be dishonest to pretend everything is simple on the American side. According to the **Straits Times**, several European leaders arrive in Ankara with the explicit intent of smoothing over tensions built up with **Donald Trump**, notably following his remarks about **Canada** and **Greenland**, as well as European criticism over the **lack of support** from certain allies during the recent American confrontation with **Iran**. These **frictions** are real, and I'm not minimizing them. But they shouldn't obscure what matters: on the specific military question of deterrence against Russia, Trump remains aligned with his Alliance partners, and that's what counts for the **concrete security of the Eastern flank**. ### An expected endorsement despite the friction Based on information available before the summit, the American president is indeed expected to endorse the final declaration, including its designation of Russia as a lasting threat. That's not a minor detail: it means that even within an administration considered **unpredictable** on European matters, the **hard line toward Moscow** survives presidential mood swings. *I'll stand by this despite the criticism it draws: on this specific issue, Trump delivers. His remarks about Canada or Greenland are absurd and deserve to be denounced elsewhere, but his military alignment against Russia has, so far, remained consistent with Western interests.* ## Iran, the summit's second rhetorical front ### An explicit nuclear red line The Ankara summit is not limited to Russia. The final declaration is also expected to state, according to excerpts reported by **Euronews**, that **"Iran can never possess nuclear weapons."** This seemingly simple sentence condenses years of tension over **Iran's nuclear program** and fits within the Alliance's broader **doctrine** on proliferation. By linking Russia and Iran in the same text as major sources of concern, NATO draws a threat map consistent with what the most clear-eyed Western analysts have long argued: the **informal axis** between **Moscow**, **Tehran**, **Pyongyang** and **Beijing** is no longer theory but **factual observation**. ### A welcome strategic coherence Addressing these issues together rather than in silos allows the Alliance to present a **global deterrence doctrine** rather than a patchwork of one-off responses. This is exactly the kind of coherent strategic vision that advocates of a **strong West** have been demanding since the start of the decade. *Naming the Iranian threat in the same breath as the Russian threat isn't conflation, it's clarity. These regimes already cooperate on **drones**, on **munitions**, on **evading sanctions**. Treating them separately would be naive.* ## European unity put to the test ### Persistent internal divergences Nor should we paint too smooth a picture of this Western unity. Some Alliance members, notably in Central Europe, continue to haggle over the **exact share** of their financial contribution to the **140-billion-euro** fund earmarked for Ukraine. National budget debates, in **Germany** as in **France**, show that the **displayed consensus** in Ankara will still have to survive the **parliamentary realities** of each capital. These internal frictions are nothing new. Since the conflict began in 2022, every NATO summit has had to contend with **electoral calendars**, **populist opposition** and competing budget priorities. What's different in Ankara is that pressure from the ground, with a **Russia** that has shown no sign of wanting to negotiate seriously, makes these **hesitations** increasingly hard to justify to the public. ### Poland and the Baltics on the front line The most geographically exposed countries, such as **Poland**, **Lithuania**, **Latvia** and **Estonia**, remain the most fervent advocates of a hard line. Their border position with Russia or **Belarus** gives them a **particular legitimacy** to demand firm commitments, and their **voice carries weight** in the final negotiations over the Ankara text. *It's always the countries closest to danger that push hardest for firmness, and the countries farthest away that hesitate the longest. This geography of fear and courage says a lot about human nature, but also about the need to listen to those who live with the threat every day.* ## Ukrainian drones, a strategic bargaining chip ### Expertise turned diplomatic asset One of the most fascinating aspects of this summit remains the explicit recognition of **Ukraine** as a **provider of defense technology**, and no longer merely a recipient of aid. Ukrainian expertise in combat **drones**, developed under the pressure of war, is now actively **sought after** by several Western militaries looking to **rapidly modernize** their own capabilities. This **reversal in the balance of power** changes the very nature of the discussions in Ankara. Kyiv no longer arrives as a mere supplicant, but with cards to negotiate, **know-how** to trade, field expertise that neither the United States nor the major European powers have had to develop with the same intensity. ### A model that inspires beyond Ukraine Several **Western military officials** have in fact begun incorporating lessons drawn directly from the **Ukrainian battlefield** into their own doctrines. This **flow of military knowledge**, now moving in both directions, shows just how much Ukraine has established itself as a **strategic laboratory** from which the entire West is learning. *Watching Ukraine move from student to military instructor in just a few years is genuinely remarkable. This country paid in blood for this expertise, and it would be indecent not to give it its due credit.* ## What Moscow is probably taking away from this summit ### A cold calculation on the Kremlin's side Never underestimate the **Kremlin's** ability to coldly read a balance of power, even as its **domestic propaganda** tells its population a different story. The official designation of Russia as a long-term threat, combined with a **quantified and dated financial commitment** spanning two years, sends a signal Russian strategists will find hard to ignore: the West shows no **sign of fatigue**, despite more than four years of conflict. This doesn't mean **Putin** will change his strategy overnight. But every summit that confirms the solidity of the Western front further undermines the **Kremlin's original bet**, that of a **Western weariness** that would eventually give way before Ukrainian resistance did. ### The failed bet on a divided Europe Moscow's strategic bet since 2022 relied heavily on the idea that a **divided** and exhausted **Europe** would eventually drop its support for Kyiv. The Ankara summit, with its precise figures and unambiguous language, is a further **rebuttal** to that calculation, even though no one claims the game is won. *Every summit that holds firm is a silent slap in Moscow's face. It's not spectacular, it's not a battlefield victory, but it's exactly the kind of diplomatic perseverance that, accumulated over years, ends up weighing more than a single battle.* ## Conclusion: firmness as the only credible option ### A signal sent to both Kyiv and Moscow This Ankara summit will likely be remembered as a rhetorical **turning point** more than a sharp strategic break. But in a war where the patience of some Western publics is fraying, **clarity of language** matters. Designating Russia as a long-term threat, precisely quantifying aid to Ukraine, and reaffirming Article 5 without hedging, is a refusal to let the **slightest doubt** linger over Western resolve. ### What comes next will be decided on the ground Ankara's words will now need to translate into actual weapons deliveries, **budgets genuinely disbursed**, and sustained diplomatic pressure on Moscow. History will judge this summit not by its declaration, but by what follows on the ground, in the **trenches of Donbas** and in the Ukrainian skies where the drone battle plays out every night. *I'll end on a note of cautious hope rather than triumphalism: this summit doesn't win the war by itself, but it strips Putin of one of his **last hopes**, that of seeing the West tire out before Ukraine does. As long as that resolve holds, Ukrainian resistance holds too.* **By Maxime Marquette, columnist** ## Columnist's transparency note ### Editorial stance I am not a journalist but a **columnist and analyst**. My expertise lies in observing and analysing the geopolitical, economic and strategic dynamics that shape our world. My work is to take political strategies apart, to understand global economic movements, to put the decisions of international actors in context and to offer analytical perspectives on the changes that are redefining our societies. I do not claim the cold objectivity of traditional journalism, which stops at reporting facts. **I claim analytical clarity**, rigorous interpretation and a deep understanding of the complex issues that concern us all. My role is to give meaning to the facts, to place them in their historical and strategic context, and to offer a critical reading of events. ### Method and sources This text keeps the basic distinction between **verified facts and interpretive analysis**. The rule never changes: a factual claim is published only when a verifiable source supports it, and the sources this article actually used are listed under **Sources**, never here. **Primary source families** used by the publication, when the story has them: official statements from governments and international institutions, public statements by political leaders, reports from intergovernmental organisations, dispatches from recognised international news agencies. **Secondary source families**: specialised publications, internationally recognised news media, analyses from established research institutions, reports from industry organisations. When an article cites statistical, economic or geopolitical data, it comes from the institutions that produce it (intergovernmental organisations, central banks, national statistics offices), and the exact institution is named under **Sources**. ### Nature of the analysis The analyses, interpretations and perspectives in the analytical sections of this article are a **critical, contextual synthesis** based on the information available, the trends observed and the expert comments cited in the sources consulted. My role is to interpret these facts, to set them in the context of today's geopolitical and economic dynamics, and to give them a coherent meaning within the larger story of the changes shaping our time. These analyses reflect expertise built through continuous observation of international affairs and an understanding of the strategic mechanisms that drive global actors. This article describes a documented state of affairs on its publication date, not a prediction: later developments may shift its outlook. No update is promised in advance; when an article is corrected or completed, the change is dated in the text. ## Sources ### Primary sources - Pravda Ukraine — NATO to label Russia a direct threat, July 3, 2026 - Euronews — NATO to reaffirm ironclad commitment to Article 5 at Ankara summit, July 3, 2026 - NATO — Official overview of the 2026 Ankara summit ### Secondary sources - Atlantic Council — How European allies can boost NATO unity at the Ankara summit - Straits Times — NATO leaders gather in Ankara aiming to smooth over tensions with Trump - Reuters — NATO leaders affirm ironclad commitment to collective defense, Ankara summit text, July 3, 2026 - Anadolu Agency — NATO chief warns Russia will remain a long-term threat, July 1, 2026 --- Source: Maxime Marquette, MadMax. When citing, name the author and link https://mad-max.co/en/article/l-otan-designe-enfin-la-russie-comme-la-menace-qu-elle-est