Lithuania's President Hopes for Trump's Sacred Word on Article 5 at Ankara

Introduction: a word that could change everything

An expectation hanging on a single term

Just days before the NATO summit set for Ankara on July 7 and 8, 2026, Lithuanian president Gitanas Nausėda voiced, in an interview with public broadcaster LRT on its program Dienos tema, an expectation as simple as it is loaded with meaning: to hear Donald Trump describe Article 5 of the North Atlantic treaty as "sacred."

"We are still waiting for a very clear statement that Article 5 is unquestionable, sacred," Nausėda said, adding: "I hope this will be said in one form or another in Ankara." That seemingly modest sentence sums up, on its own, the persistent anxiety of a Baltic country living a few dozen kilometres from the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad.

A clause invoked only once in history

It bears repeating that Article 5, the collective defence clause stating that an attack on one NATO member is an attack on all, has been invoked only once in the entire history of the Atlantic Alliance: after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States. This singular precedent gives real symbolic weight to the request coming from Vilnius.

Ankara, a summit under tension before it even opens

Thirty-two members expected in the Turkish capital

All 32 members of NATO are expected in Ankara for this crucial summit, which is set to formalize a collective pledge of 70 billion euros, roughly $80 billion, in military aid to Ukraine for 2026, with a commitment to provide "at least an equivalent amount" in 2027. According to Reuters, NATO ambassadors already approved, on July 3, 2026, draft declaration language in which Trump and other leaders would affirm an "ironclad commitment" to Article 5.

If this announcement materializes at the summit, it would represent a particularly welcome signal of collective firmness for eastern flank countries, which have scrutinized every American statement with near-obsessive attention through years of rising tensions with Moscow.

A climate clouded by criticism from Washington

This atmosphere of positive expectation is nonetheless clouded by recent statements from Donald Trump, who described the state of defence spending within NATO as "not reciprocal" and "ridiculous" on his Truth Social platform on Thursday, just days before the summit opened. He also criticized spending levels in Germany, one of the economic pillars of the Atlantic Alliance.

The turbulent legacy of the Hague summit

The 2025 "paper tiger"

This Lithuanian worry did not come out of nowhere: in 2025, Donald Trump had called NATO a "paper tiger" and publicly questioned the "multiple definitions" of Article 5 at the Hague summit. Those remarks sent shockwaves through European allies, before the American president ultimately declared "I support it fully," in a reversal typical of his unpredictable diplomatic style.

This back-and-forth between alarming statements and reassuring guarantees remains, for many European leaders, one of the chief challenges of managing transatlantic relations under this presidency, where every summit becomes an occasion for renewed uncertainty about the real solidity of the American commitment.

The 5% of GDP target, born from that same summit

It was also at this 2025 Hague summit that the collective target of 5% of GDP devoted to defence by 2035 was set, split between 3.5% in direct military spending and 1.5% in infrastructure. This ambitious target now shapes every budgetary debate within the Atlantic Alliance, including the recurring criticism from Washington toward allies deemed too slow to comply.

An unprecedented nuclear ambition for Lithuania

Toward a historic constitutional amendment

Beyond the question of Article 5 alone, Lithuania is now seeking to lift the constitutional ban preventing it from hosting nuclear weapons on its territory. President Nausėda himself announced a constitutional amendment initiative aimed at fully integrating his country into the Western nuclear deterrence framework against Russia, an unprecedented move since Lithuanian independence.

This ambition reflects a profound shift in Baltic security doctrine, which now holds that conventional protection alone, however reinforced, is no longer enough to guarantee full deterrence against a Russia armed with nuclear weapons and directly bordering it through the Kaliningrad exclave.

Merz watches the move with cautious respect

German chancellor Friedrich Merz responded to this initiative by saying he had "noted it with respect," a diplomatic phrase that reflects both an implicit acknowledgment of the legitimacy of the Lithuanian request and an assumed caution toward an issue as sensitive as expanding the Western nuclear umbrella in Eastern Europe.

Budrys and the conviction that Trump strengthened the Alliance

A Lithuanian minister defending Trump's record

Lithuanian foreign minister Kęstutis Budrys offered, in an op-ed published on May 27 by Foreign Policy, a resolutely positive assessment of Donald Trump's record on NATO: "I am convinced the conclusion will be that President Trump made this alliance stronger, not weaker," he wrote, a claim that cuts against the concerns more generally associated with the current American presidency.

This position, coming from a policymaker directly exposed to the Russian threat, deserves to be taken seriously: it suggests that, despite his repeated verbal provocations, the Trump administration has in fact achieved concrete results in collective European rearmament, a record that the president's own noisy statements sometimes tend to obscure.

Tangible results despite the divisive style

Steadily rising defence spending figures across nearly every European NATO country do seem to back this reading: whatever one thinks of Donald Trump's style, the pressure he has exerted on European allies has undeniably accelerated their collective rearmament in recent years.

Hybrid threats intensify in the Baltic

Smuggling balloons and suspicious drones

On the ground, hybrid threats keep multiplying across the Baltic region: smuggling balloons crossing the border from Belarus, repeated incursions by Russian drones into neighbouring countries' airspace, suspicious maritime incidents in the Baltic Sea. These provocations, though individually limited in severity, help maintain constant psychological pressure on local populations and authorities.

This hybrid war, waged without openly crossing the threshold of conventional armed conflict, considerably complicates the task of Baltic authorities, who must respond firmly without handing Moscow the pretext for the direct military escalation they are precisely trying to avoid.

Eastern Sentry and Baltic Sentry missions in support

Facing this ongoing pressure, the Eastern Sentry and Baltic Sentry missions deployed by NATO have, according to president Nausėda himself, helped reduce the hostile activity observed in the region, a positive record that justifies their continuation and, potentially, their future reinforcement as part of the discussions in Ankara.

Bulgaria and potential fractures within the Alliance

Dissenting voices on future cohesion

Bulgarian press reports have raised fears, voiced by some analysts, that NATO could be weakened by uneven military spending among its members, a dreaded scenario fuelling repeated calls for faster budgetary convergence among allies, particularly those on the most exposed eastern flank.

These concerns, though a minority view in Western public debate, are a reminder that the cohesion of the Atlantic Alliance is never fully secured, and that every summit, including the one in Ankara, is an opportunity either to reaffirm or to weaken that collective unity against Russia.

The need for a unified message

It is precisely for this reason that Lithuania's request for a clear word from Donald Trump on the sacred nature of Article 5 carries real strategic weight: such a message, delivered publicly in Ankara, would send a signal of cohesion hard to ignore, both for allied public opinion and for Kremlin leaders who closely watch every potential crack.

What history will remember from this moment

A pivotal moment for transatlantic credibility

The Ankara summit therefore looks set to be a potentially pivotal moment for the credibility of the American commitment to its European allies, at a time when Russia continues to watch closely for any sign of division or hesitation within the Atlantic Alliance. Lithuania's request, however modest it may appear in formal terms, actually crystallizes a major strategic stake for the entire European continent.

This diplomatic sequence fits into a broader reshaping of transatlantic balances, in which European countries, while continuing to rely on the American security umbrella, are investing massively in their own defence capabilities so as no longer to depend exclusively on Washington's shifting moods.

A test for the future of collective deterrence

Whatever the exact outcome of the summit, this sequence will at least have had the merit of clarifying the expectations of eastern flank countries toward their most powerful allies, while also reminding everyone that collective deterrence rests as much on reassuring public words as on concrete military capabilities deployed on the ground.

China and Russia are watching, as always

An axis of revisionist powers on alert

Beyond the purely transatlantic dossier, it is worth remembering that China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea closely follow every sign of weakness or strength within NATO. Any impression of Western division, real or merely perceived, could be exploited by these revisionist powers to advance their own respective strategic agendas within their spheres of influence.

This global dimension explains why Nausėda's request goes far beyond a simple Lithuanian-American bilateral matter: it fits into a wider competition between an international order dominated by the West and powers actively seeking to challenge it by every means available.

Why verbal firmness matters as much as tanks

In this context of global competition, the verbal firmness publicly expressed by Western leaders matters almost as much as the number of tanks or launchers deployed on the ground: it directly shapes how potential adversaries perceive the Atlantic Alliance's collective determination to defend every one of its members, without exception.

The hidden economic stakes behind the diplomacy

The financial weight of collective rearmament

Behind these diplomatic exchanges also lies a considerable economic stake: the collective target of 5% of GDP for defence by 2035 represents colossal sums for European economies as a whole, with direct repercussions on national budgets, defence industries and, potentially, other public sectors such as health or education.

This budgetary reality partly explains the persistent tensions among European allies over the pace of implementing these commitments, with some countries pushing for a more gradual path while others, like Lithuania, have already far exceeded the collective targets set for the entire Alliance.

An industrial opportunity for the most advanced allies

This massive rearmament also represents a significant industrial opportunity for countries with a solid defence industrial base, notably the United States, which directly benefits from arms contracts signed by their European allies, as illustrated by Lithuania's acquisition of HIMARS launchers from Lockheed Martin.

The quiet but crucial role of parliamentary diplomacy

Exchanges that go beyond heads of state alone

Beyond the highly publicized presidential statements, a quiet parliamentary diplomacy continues to unfold between allied capitals, where delegations of Lithuanian, German, and American lawmakers regularly discuss the concrete details of implementing commitments made at successive NATO summits.

This groundwork, less spectacular than presidential announcements, nonetheless contributes directly to the lasting solidity of collective commitments, providing the technical and budgetary follow-through essential to the long-term credibility of any diplomatic promise made at an international summit.

A vigilance that must remain constant

This parliamentary vigilance, combined with pressure from the public opinion of the most exposed countries, forms an additional safeguard against the risk of commitments made in Ankara becoming dead letters once media attention shifts to other international news.

How allied capitals view the Lithuanian sequence

Warsaw and Helsinki are watching closely

Poland and Finland, two other front-line countries facing Russia, are following Vilnius's requests with particular attention, aware that any clarification the Lithuanians obtain on Article 5 or on the nuclear question would set a precedent for the entire eastern flank of the Atlantic Alliance.

This informal solidarity among front-line countries, from the Arctic Circle to the Black Sea, illustrates the gradual formation of a coherent regional bloc, united by a shared reading of the Russian threat and by a shared determination to keep up the pressure on the Alliance's most powerful members.

Collective pressure rather than isolated moves

This collective approach, rather than isolated bilateral moves, considerably strengthens the diplomatic weight of the Lithuanian request, which can no longer be seen as a mere national worry but as the expression of a concern shared across the entire eastern flank of the Atlantic Alliance toward Russia.

This collective dynamic should, according to several observers, weigh directly on the final content of the joint declaration expected at the close of the Ankara summit, with the drafters having to take into account the particular sensitivities of these geographically most exposed countries.

The delicate balance between firmness and diplomatic openness

Not closing every door to future dialogue

Despite the firmness displayed by the Baltic states, several Western diplomats stress the need not to entirely close the door to future dialogue with Moscow, if only to avoid an uncontrolled escalation whose consequences would be unpredictable for the entire European continent.

This delicate balance between deterrent firmness and residual diplomatic openness has characterized the Western posture toward Russia for several years now, a difficult tightrope to walk but one that most allies see as the least bad option available in the current context.

The Ankara summit as one step in a longer process

The Ankara summit should therefore not be seen as an end in itself, but as one more step in a long-term process aimed at building a credible, lasting Western deterrence capable of adapting to the constantly evolving Russian posture in the region.

This long-term view, shared by most serious analysts of the issue, invites us to put into perspective the importance of a single word said or not said by Donald Trump, while acknowledging that this word still carries real symbolic value for the populations most directly exposed to the Russian threat.

The symbolic weight of words in modern diplomacy

When a sentence is worth as much as a treaty

In contemporary diplomacy, a single sentence spoken by a head of state can sometimes carry as much weight as a formally signed treaty, especially when it comes from the president of the United States, the leading military power of the Atlantic Alliance. It is precisely this phenomenon that Lithuania is seeking to leverage by publicly stating its expectation of Donald Trump even before the Ankara summit opens.

This strategy of public pressure, openly embraced by Gitanas Nausėda, illustrates an interesting evolution among small powers within large alliances: rather than passively waiting for decisions from major capitals, they now choose to clearly voice their expectations through the media, forcing a public debate that traditional quiet diplomacy might otherwise have kept confidential.

A lesson in strategic communication

This communication approach, which consists of stating a precise expectation ahead of a major diplomatic event, offers a lesson in communication strategy for other small powers facing similar security challenges from authoritarian neighbours far more powerful than them in strictly military terms.

By making its expectation public, Vilnius also raises the pressure on Washington to honour this request at the summit, knowing that presidential silence on this specific point would now be read, rightly or wrongly, as a negative signal by a large share of public opinion and specialized observers of the transatlantic file.

Conclusion: Ankara, a full-scale test for the West

A word that could reassure an entire continent

Whether or not Donald Trump utters the word "sacred" about Article 5 at the Ankara summit, this Lithuanian expectation will have had the merit of reminding everyone just how heavily the American president's words continue to weigh on the security of an entire continent. For countries like Lithuania, every word counts, every nuance is scrutinized, every silence can be read as a worrying signal by a Kremlin forever on the lookout for the slightest crack.

An Alliance that must prove its solidity through deeds as much as words

Beyond the words, it is the 70 billion euros pledged to Ukraine, the brigades stationed in Lithuania, the HIMARS launchers delivered, and the collective budgetary targets that will determine, over the long run, the real credibility of Western deterrence against Russia. The Ankara summit stands, in that sense, as a full-scale test for the entire Atlantic Alliance.

By Maxime Marquette, columnist

Columnist's transparency note

Who I am and what I don't know

I am a columnist and analyst of transatlantic relations, not a diplomat or member of an official delegation involved in the preparatory discussions for the Ankara summit. This narrative relies exclusively on public statements, televised interviews, and international press reports, without access to any confidential documents.

My acknowledged bias is clear support for NATO's posture of collective firmness against Russia, and a nuanced recognition of Donald Trump's record on this specific issue: positive on the military and budgetary front, more debatable on other aspects of his presidency that I do not address here. I do not claim to know the exact content of the speech the American president will give in Ankara.

My method for this narrative

This piece cross-references information reported by LRT, Reuters, Anadolu Agency, Foreign Policy, and Deutsche Welle, covering both president Nausėda's statements, the preparatory context of the Ankara summit, and official German positions on the Lithuanian nuclear question.

Sources

Primary sources

LRT — Lithuania's president expects Trump to say NATO is sacred at Ankara summit

Reuters — NATO leaders affirm ironclad commitment to collective defence, Ankara summit text, July 3, 2026

Anadolu Agency — Factbox on NATO defense spending ahead of the Ankara summit

Secondary sources

Fakti.bg — Lithuanian president raises risk of NATO fragmentation

Wikipedia — 2026 Ankara NATO summit

Forbes — What defense leaders will discuss at the 2026 NATO summit, July 1, 2026

Foreign Policy — Op-ed by Kęstutis Budrys, Lithuanian foreign minister, May 27, 2026

Deutsche Welle — Merz responds to Trump's criticism at Baltic event