# Turkey, NATO's Growing Pillar as the US Pulls Back > The Dutch defense chief, General Onno Eichelsheim, gave the Anadolu news agency an assessment that neatly sums up the current mood inside - Author: Maxime Marquette - Publisher: MadMax (https://mad-max.co) - Section: Note - Published: 2026-07-06 - Canonical URL: https://mad-max.co/en/article/la-turquie-pilier-grandissant-de-l-otan-face-au-retrait-americain ## Introduction: an assessment from the Netherlands ahead of the Ankara summit ### A blunt statement days before the summit The Dutch **defense** chief, General **Onno Eichelsheim**, gave the **Anadolu** news agency an assessment that neatly sums up the current mood inside **NATO**: **Turkey's** **strategic** role within the **Alliance** will keep growing as the **United States** scales back some of its deployed capabilities in Europe. This statement, made during a visit to **Ankara** ahead of the NATO summit scheduled for Monday and Tuesday, points to a major strategic repositioning within the Atlantic Alliance. The timing isn't incidental: just days before a pivotal summit where the **32 member states** must show they can turn the **budget** **commitments** made last year in The Hague into concrete reality, this public acknowledgment of Turkey's growing role sends a clear signal about the new European **security** architecture taking shape. ### Why this assessment matters **Turkey** fields NATO's second-largest armed force, guards the **Alliance's** southeastern flank, and has a **defense** industry capable of meeting a growing share of European **military** capability needs. This threefold advantage positions Ankara as an unavoidable player amid the current recalibration of American military presence on the continent. This recognition comes as Washington has confirmed reductions in brigades, fighter jets, and naval **capabilities** stationed in Europe, a shift that's mechanically pushing several **European** allies to fill the capability gaps left by this American **strategic** pivot toward the Indo-Pacific. *I see this statement as a positive and necessary evolution for the **Alliance**. Turkey has long been viewed as a difficult ally, but its real **military** weight now makes it an unavoidable pillar of Western **deterrence** against Russia, and it's time this reality gets acknowledged unambiguously by its European partners.* ## The priority target of 3.5% in Ankara ### Turning a commitment into budgetary reality According to General **Eichelsheim**, the single most important outcome expected from the **Ankara** **summit** would be the concrete implementation of the **commitment** to raise **defense** spending to **3.5% of GDP**, a pledge made at the previous summit in **The Hague**. This interim target fits within a broader trajectory toward the final goal of **5%** set for 2035. The **Netherlands** has already prepared a white paper demonstrating its intent to reach, or even exceed, the 5% target, a posture that reflects a Dutch **commitment** to lead by example rather than simply demanding effort from other **European** allies. ### A Europe that must do more without replacing the United States The Dutch general stresses an essential balancing point: Europe must take on more responsibility to offset the gradual withdrawal of certain American **capabilities**, without pretending it can entirely do without **Washington's** support. This nuance reflects a persistent **strategic** reality, one where Europe has the potential to close the gaps but needs time to fully get there. This honest acknowledgment of the current limits of **European** **capabilities** avoids the double trap of denial about the American drawdown and excessive doom-saying that would ignore the real progress several **European** countries have already made in recent years. *I credit this balanced approach, which rejects both the illusion of immediate **European** autonomy and the fatalism of eternal dependence on Washington. This is exactly the kind of **strategic** realism the **Alliance** needs heading into this pivotal summit.* ## Turkey, the Alliance's second-largest armed force ### A military weight often underestimated in Western Europe It's striking how often **Turkey's** real military weight gets underestimated in European discussions about collective **defense**. With NATO's second-largest army by personnel, Ankara has a mobilization capacity that few other **Alliance** members can match, a major **strategic** asset amid the current prolonged tension with Russia. This **military** reality comes alongside a booming Turkish **defense** industry, capable of producing drones, armored vehicles, and anti-aircraft defense systems at competitive costs, an industrial capacity drawing growing interest from other **Alliance** members looking to diversify their military supply sources. ### A strategic geographic role on the southeastern flank **Turkey's** geographic position, at the crossroads of Europe, the Middle East, and the Black Sea, gives it a unique **strategic** role for monitoring and deterring Russian **military** activity in this sensitive region. This geography, combined with its military **power**, explains why many allies increasingly see Ankara as an unavoidable partner. This Turkish geographic centrality takes on renewed importance as the war in Ukraine continues to directly affect stability in the Black Sea **region**, a theater where **cooperation** with Turkey is becoming strategically indispensable for the entire Atlantic **Alliance**. *I think Western Europe has for too long underestimated the Turkish asset, out of simple ignorance or old political reluctance. Facing Russia, every **military** **capability** counts, and Turkey's deserves to be fully integrated into the West's collective deterrence **strategy**.* ## The "NATO 3.0" concept and its implications ### Rethinking collective resilience against new threats The concept dubbed **"NATO 3.0"** rests on the idea that modern **deterrence** requires not just resilient societies, but also a robust, diversified **defense** **industrial** base, combining both costly, sophisticated weapons systems and cheaper solutions like drones and lighter interception systems. This two-track approach reflects lessons drawn from the **conflict** in Ukraine, where the massive use of cheap drones has proven its tactical effectiveness, alongside the pricier anti-aircraft **defense** systems traditionally favored by Western **military** planners. ### Joint exercises and greater experience-sharing This new doctrine comes with a stated intent to strengthen joint **military** exercises among allies, potentially including deeper bilateral collaboration with **Turkey**, covering **equipment** interoperability, training at **defense** academies, and sharing lessons drawn directly from the Ukrainian battlefield. This collaborative dimension illustrates a positive shift in the Alliance's strategic culture, moving from a siloed, country-by-country approach toward deeper integration of capabilities and tactical lessons among partners with complementary military profiles. *I see in this NATO 3.0 concept a smart adaptation to the realities of the modern battlefield. The war in Ukraine has proven that deterrence is no longer just about tanks and fighter jets, but now also includes the industrial capacity to rapidly and massively produce cheaper yet equally decisive systems.* ## The broader context of the Ankara summit ### Trump's presence as a political signal **Donald Trump's** expected attendance at the **Ankara** summit underscores the importance Washington places on this new strategic configuration highlighting Turkey's role. This American presidential presence, in a country of growing importance within the Alliance, reflects Washington's implicit recognition of Ankara's rising strategic weight in the Western security architecture. On this specific military file, credit goes to **Trump** for keeping constant pressure on European allies to raise their defense budgets, pressure that has helped accelerate rearmament dynamics that decades of more genteel diplomacy had never managed to produce this quickly. ### The other items on the agenda Beyond the budget question alone, the summit will also need to address continued support for **Ukraine**, Western defense industrial output, and the security of sensitive zones like the Strait of Hormuz, against a regional backdrop marked by lingering tensions inherited from the Israel-Iran conflict of winter and spring 2026. This packed agenda illustrates the scale of security challenges the Alliance must address simultaneously, at a time when the margin for strategic error keeps shrinking against adversaries, namely Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, who are increasingly coordinating their own strategic interests. *I credit without reservation the American posture on this specific military file: the pressure Trump has applied to accelerate Western rearmament is producing concrete **results**, and the Ankara summit will be the moment to check whether this positive momentum finally translates into firm, lasting budgetary commitments.* ## The persistent challenges of cooperating with Ankara ### Historically complex relations still to overcome It would be naive to claim that the relationship between **Turkey** and its Western partners within NATO has always been simple. Persistent disagreements over several regional files and occasional divergences on policy toward certain Middle Eastern actors have at times complicated Ankara's full strategic integration into the Alliance in recent years. These historical complexities shouldn't, however, obscure the pragmatic need to strengthen cooperation with a partner whose military weight and geographic position grow more decisive every year for collective security against a Russia showing no sign of easing its aggression against Ukraine. ### A strategic pragmatism that must prevail Given the scale of shared threats, particularly from Russia, strategic pragmatism must now take precedence over occasional political disputes between **Ankara** and its Western partners. This pragmatic approach already seems to be at work, as shown by General Eichelsheim's statement explicitly acknowledging the growing importance of Turkey's role in the Alliance's strategic balance. This growing pragmatism among allies with sometimes divergent profiles is precisely the kind of strategic maturity NATO needs to remain a credible deterrent force against adversaries who, for their part, closely coordinate their own shared geopolitical interests. *I think this growing pragmatism toward Turkey is a welcome maturity for the Atlantic Alliance. Facing coordinated adversaries like Russia, China, and Iran, the West can no longer afford to let secondary disagreements weaken military cooperation this strategically essential.* ## Turkey's defense industry as an added asset for the Alliance ### Booming production of drones and armored vehicles Beyond its sheer numbers, **Turkey** has built, over the past decade, a national defense industry capable of producing combat drones, armored vehicles, and anti-aircraft defense systems at costs well below those of major traditional Western manufacturers. This local production capacity, largely fueled by the operational successes of the **Bayraktar TB2** drone across several conflict theaters, gives Ankara growing commercial and strategic influence with several allied governments looking to diversify their military supply sources. Several European countries, facing longer delivery times from traditional Western suppliers, have already opened discussions with Turkish manufacturers to acquire complementary defense systems, a trend likely to accelerate if the **Ankara** summit produces concrete commitments for deeper industrial cooperation among allies. ### A partner increasingly sought out by Ukraine itself Turkish-Ukrainian military cooperation, already solid before Russia's 2022 invasion, has deepened further since, with **Kyiv** continuing to rely on certain Turkish equipment to round out its arsenal against **Russia**. This bilateral relationship concretely illustrates how Turkey's industrial rise directly benefits Ukrainian resistance, beyond institutional discussions within NATO alone. Ankara also retains a distinctive diplomatic role, having facilitated several prisoner exchanges and maintained a dialogue channel with Moscow, a balancing act that, far from weakening its Western credibility, instead demonstrates a regional influence capacity that few other Alliance members can claim today. *I believe this Turkish industrial capacity should be more fully leveraged by all Western allies, rather than held back by outdated political reluctance. Facing a Russia that produces weapons at a sustained pace, every reliable and affordable supply source matters for collective deterrence.* ## The legitimate concerns that remain regardless ### The still-sensitive question of Russian equipment It would be dishonest to ignore that **Turkey** previously acquired Russian **S-400** anti-aircraft defense systems, a decision that triggered sharp tensions with **Washington** and led to Ankara's exclusion from the **F-35** fighter jet program. This lingering gray zone is a reminder that Turkey's strategic integration into the Alliance, however positive today, shouldn't obscure past choices that continue to weigh on the **trust** of some Western partners. This residual wariness, while legitimate, shouldn't prevent the Alliance from fully leveraging the very real military and industrial assets Turkey offers today, at a time when the absolute priority remains collective deterrence against Russian aggression showing no sign of slowing. ### Necessary vigilance without slipping into presumption of guilt Western vigilance regarding Turkish strategic choices remains justified, but it must never turn into a blanket presumption of guilt that would block any constructive cooperation. The balance to strike is to fully welcome Ankara's positive contributions to collective security, while maintaining a demanding dialogue on the issues where differences persist. It's precisely this pragmatic balance that General **Eichelsheim's** statement seems to embody, acknowledging Turkey's strategic weight without denying the historical complexities that continue to shape the relationship between Ankara and its Western partners within NATO. *I remain convinced that vigilance over some of Ankara's past choices must coexist with an honest acknowledgment of its present contributions. Refusing this balance would mean depriving the West of an ally whose military weight grows more decisive by the day against Russia.* ## Conclusion: a strong signal for Western unity ### A recognition arriving at the right moment General **Eichelsheim's** statement comes at a pivotal moment for the Atlantic Alliance, as the **Ankara** summit must demonstrate the Allies' collective ability to turn budgetary commitments into concrete reality, while fully embracing new strategic balances in which Turkey holds a growing and deserved place. This public recognition of Turkey's role, far from being a mere diplomatic formality, reflects a deep structural shift in the European security architecture, one set to consolidate further in the years ahead as the Russian threat to the continent persists. ### Ankara as a test of Western solidarity The **Ankara** summit will be an important test of the West's ability to harmoniously integrate new internal power balances within the Alliance, without ever losing sight of the fundamental shared goal: maintaining credible deterrence against Russia and preserving the collective security of a European continent that remains, more than ever, at the center of global geopolitical stakes. *I'm closing this piece convinced that Turkey fully deserves the strategic recognition it's receiving today. Western unity grows stronger precisely when it knows how to intelligently integrate all its available assets, rather than neglecting them out of habitual diplomatic comfort.* **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 - Anadolu Agency — Dutch defense chief predicts a growing role for Turkey, July 5, 2026 - Anadolu Agency — Where NATO allies stand ahead of the Ankara summit ### Secondary sources - Washington Post — Trump's attendance at NATO summit will highlight Turkey, July 3, 2026 - Reuters — Defense and aerospace news - Wikipedia — 2026 Ankara NATO summit - Forbes — What defense leaders will discuss at the 2026 NATO summit --- Source: Maxime Marquette, MadMax. When citing, name the author and link https://mad-max.co/en/article/la-turquie-pilier-grandissant-de-l-otan-face-au-retrait-americain