# Why the Shortened Ankara Summit Is a Win for NATO > For the first time since 2004, NATO is bringing its heads of state and government together in Turkey, but this time in - Author: Maxime Marquette - Publisher: MadMax (https://mad-max.co) - Section: Editorial - Published: 2026-07-06 - Canonical URL: https://mad-max.co/en/article/pourquoi-le-sommet-ecourte-d-ankara-est-une-victoire-pour-l-otan ## Key takeaways - The format was chosen to limit rhetorical risks, following The Hague summit, which secured a reaffirmation of US commitment to Article 5. - NATO members committed to 5% of GDP on defense by 2035 (3.5% core, 1.5% related), and all allies exceeded 2% in 2025. - Allies are reportedly set to pledge 70 billion euros in military aid to Ukraine for 2026, with at least equivalent levels planned for 2027, and PURL funding is expected to be expanded. - The article credits Trump's pressure with boosting European spending, while noting his criticism of Germany and of US support levels, and frictions over Greenland, Iran and troop withdrawals. - European diplomats reportedly show fatigue with Trump's outbursts, and experts say China remains an underaddressed topic. ## Introduction: a shorter summit, but not a weaker one ### A format unseen in twenty-two years For the first time since **2004**, **NATO** is bringing its heads of state and government together in **Turkey**, but this time in a radically compressed format: a single plenary session, a dinner, and a short statement rather than the traditional 50-to-70-paragraph communiqué (The Chicago Council on Global Affairs). This choice is not a sign of institutional weakness, but a deliberate tactical decision to avoid any public friction with American President **Donald Trump**. The precedent set by last year's **The Hague** summit validated this approach: by limiting moments of public exposure and the risk of rhetorical missteps, the **Alliance** secured from **Trump** a clear reaffirmation of America's commitment to Article 5 (RTL Today). **Ankara** is repeating that recipe, and this is exactly what the West must do to preserve its strategic unity. ### What this choice reveals about the Alliance's maturity Far from a capitulation to an unpredictable ally's whims, this condensed format reflects a realistic reading of the current balance of power. **NATO** has understood that excessive ceremony and flashy statements feed **Trump**'s criticism far more than a sober exercise focused on concrete **results**: defense contracts, military **spending**, support for **Ukraine** (Reuters). Secretary General **Mark Rutte** summed up the stakes with rare candor for an **Alliance** leader: this **summit** marks the shift from burden-sharing to its actual transfer onto Europeans and Canadians, a necessary evolution against the combined threats of **Russia**, **China**, **Iran**, and **North Korea** (CNBC). *I think this shortened format is nothing like a symbolic surrender to Trump. It is, on the contrary, proof of strategic maturity: the West is finally learning how to manage a difficult ally without sacrificing what matters most, unity and collective deterrence against our shared adversaries.* ## A historic rise in European defense budgets ### The 5% of GDP target becomes a credible trajectory Since the **The Hague** summit in June 2025, **NATO**'s 32 members have committed to raising **defense** **spending** to **5% of GDP** by 2035, including **3.5%** for core defense needs and **1.5%** for related security spending (EveryCRSReport). In 2025, all allies for the first time exceeded the historic **2% of GDP** threshold set at the 2014 Wales summit (Anadolu Ajansı). European allies and Canada increased their military **spending** by **20%** in one year, representing more than **90 billion dollars** in additional real terms, or roughly **139 billion** in nominal value (**NATO**). This is a strong signal sent directly to **Vladimir Putin**: the West is not retreating, it is accelerating. ### Massive industrial contracts on the horizon Secretary General **Rutte** announced that tens of billions of dollars in new **defense** contracts will be signed at the industrial forum held alongside the summit, with letters of intent and memoranda of understanding meant to demonstrate the **Alliance**'s real production capacity (Daily Sabah). This accelerated industrialization of Western defense is precisely what has been missing for decades. **Turkey**, the summit's host and the Alliance's second-largest army, plays a strategic role here by showcasing its own rapidly expanding **defense** industry, notably in the drone sector (video report). *I applaud this industrial acceleration without reservation. An Alliance that only promises without producing intimidates no one. Firm contracts and production lines running at full capacity, that is exactly the language Putin, Xi Jinping, and the mullahs in Tehran understand.* ## Support for Ukraine remains at the heart of the discussions ### A quantified financial commitment for 2026 and 2027 According to a text approved by **NATO** ambassadors and seen by Reuters, **Alliance** members are set to pledge **70 billion euros** in military aid to **Ukraine** for 2026, with at least equivalent levels planned for 2027 (Reuters). President **Volodymyr Zelensky** will attend the **summit** and take part in a dinner hosted by Turkish President **Recep Tayyip Erdoğan**. This level of financial commitment, combined with **Zelensky**'s direct participation in the discussions, confirms that **Ukraine** remains an absolute priority for the **Alliance**, despite internal tensions caused by **Trump**'s repeated criticism of burden-sharing (Daily Sabah). ### The PURL program's role as a continuity mechanism The American weapons purchase program for **Ukraine**, known as PURL, is expected to see its participation expanded and its multi-year funding structured more robustly (Atlantic Council). Allies have already committed more than **4.5 billion dollars** in American weaponry through this initiative (UNN). This continuous funding architecture sends a clear message to **Moscow**: time is not on its side, and Western support for **Kyiv** will not run out of steam, regardless of Washington's election cycles. *I find it reassuring that financial support for Ukraine is now structured over several years rather than renegotiated at every summit. It's this kind of strategic predictability that wears down Putin's patience far more than any symbolic statement.* ## Nuclear deterrence, the Alliance's ultimate guarantee ### A reminder of ongoing modernization **NATO**'s Nuclear Planning Group met alongside the summit preparations to address the ongoing modernization of the **Alliance**'s nuclear capabilities, considered the ultimate guarantee of collective security against Russian, Chinese, Iranian, and North Korean threats. This statement reaffirms the allies' unity and determination to maintain credible **deterrence**. This modernization, often less covered by media than conventional **spending** announcements, remains a fundamental pillar of Western security, particularly at a time when several strategic adversaries are actively developing their own arsenals. ### An increasingly dynamic security environment Allies acknowledge that today's security environment demands optimal force deployment planning, capable both of deterring conflict and effectively defending allied territory in the event of aggression. This approach reflects a clear-eyed reading of **Russia**'s growing ambitions beyond **Ukraine**. **NATO**'s force model, which relies on rigorous planning of national military commitments, continues to advance despite the adjustments announced by the **United States** regarding its own posture in Europe. *I see this emphasis on nuclear deterrence as an essential signal, often overlooked in media coverage of these summits. Facing authoritarian regimes that shrink from no provocation, the clarity of Western deterrence remains our best collective insurance policy.* ## Turkey, strategic host and rising military power ### A geopolitical role that goes beyond mere hospitality By hosting this summit for the second time since 2004, **Turkey** confirms its status as an indispensable military power within the **Alliance**, backed by the second-largest army and a rapidly expanding **defense** industry, notably in combat drones. President **Recep Tayyip Erdoğan** is using this showcase to strengthen his diplomatic influence with Washington and European capitals. This central position allows **Turkey** to negotiate deeper integration into European funding and procurement **mechanisms**, from which it remains today partially excluded despite its real military weight within the Atlantic **Alliance**. ### An increasingly strategic southern flank Persistent instability in the Middle East, exacerbated by the war in **Iran** and its regional repercussions, is pushing the **Alliance** to treat the southern flank as a strategic priority rather than a secondary concern. **Turkey**'s geographic position, at the hinge between Europe, the Middle East, and the Caucasus, makes it an indispensable partner for any coherent Western strategy against these multiple threats. Discussions in **Ankara** are also expected to address possible European contributions to maritime security and mine-clearing operations, amid persistent tensions with **Tehran**. *I see Turkey's growing role as a strategic opportunity too often underestimated by Western capitals. A military partner this powerful, sitting at the gateway to the Middle East, deserves far fuller integration into the Atlantic defense architecture.* ## Trump, a demanding ally but a necessary catalyst ### Pressure that has produced measurable results Secretary General **Rutte** publicly acknowledged that the pressure **Trump** has exerted since his first term directly contributed to this historic rise in European **defense** **spending**, a dynamic no American president since **Eisenhower** had managed to set in motion (The Washington Times). This is an uncomfortable finding for some, but a measurable fact. On the strictly military and strategic front, **Trump**'s insistence forced Europe out of its budgetary complacency, a service rendered to the entire Atlantic **Alliance**, even if his method remains often blunt and publicly humiliating for certain allies. ### Real tensions that persist despite everything The American president nonetheless called the current level of American support for **NATO** **ridiculous**, comparing the **999 billion dollars** from the United States to Poland's **44.3 billion**, while singling out **Germany** for what he called insufficient contributions (Time Magazine). These public outbursts are a reminder that the transatlantic relationship remains fragile. Additional friction over **Greenland**, the war in **Iran**, and the announced withdrawal of American troops from **Europe** feed a climate of uncertainty that the summit's short format is precisely designed to defuse (The Conference Board). *I remain clear-eyed: Trump stays a difficult ally, at times humiliating toward his European partners. But on the strictly military front, his pressure produced what decades of polite diplomacy never managed to achieve. That is the uncomfortable price of a real strategic result.* ## European criticism of Washington's hard line ### A Europe that refuses to be publicly humiliated Several European diplomats, cited in specialized press, express growing fatigue with **Trump**'s repeated public outbursts on social media, which they consider counterproductive to **Alliance** cohesion. This frustration nonetheless remains largely contained behind closed doors, out of concern for preserving the unity displayed before the cameras in **Ankara**. The European strategy consists of demonstrating quantified **results** rather than publicly responding to American criticism, an approach that has so far avoided an open rupture across the Atlantic. ### The risk of democratic fatigue over repeated demands Some analysts warn that constant pressure from **Washington** could, over time, erode public support for **NATO** in certain European countries, where voters are starting to question the durability of American commitment, independent of the announced military **spending** figures. This dynamic paradoxically strengthens the arguments in favor of a more autonomous European **defense** capacity, a debate now running through several capitals across the continent, from **Paris** to **Warsaw**. *I understand European frustration with Trump's sometimes abrasive tone, but I refuse to see it as an argument for weakening the transatlantic bond. The right response is not to drift away from Washington, but to build a militarily stronger Europe within the Alliance itself.* ## China and the Indo-Pacific, the summit's blind spot ### A systemic threat still underaddressed by the Alliance Despite the central place given to **Russia** and **Iran**, several security experts lament that **China** remains a secondary topic in the official discussions in **Ankara**, even as **Beijing** continues to strengthen its military capabilities and technological influence worldwide. This relative reticence contrasts with the urgency the systemic rivalry with **China** represents for long-term Western security. Some allies, notably the **United States**, are pushing for a more explicit inclusion of the Indo-Pacific dimension in the final statement, a request that runs into reluctance from several European countries more focused on their immediate neighborhood. ### Why the West can no longer afford this strategic myopia The logistical and economic support **China** continues to provide to the Russian war machine, documented by several Western **reports**, shows just how intimately linked the European and Asian theaters have become. Ignoring this reality at the **Ankara** summit would amount to treating symptoms without addressing the structural cause of the problem. Closer coordination between **NATO** and its Indo-Pacific partners, such as **Japan**, **South Korea**, and **Australia**, increasingly looks like a strategic necessity rather than a diplomatic option. *I think the West is making a strategic mistake by treating China as a peripheral issue at these summits. Rivalry with Beijing will shape our collective security far more durably than any Ukrainian front line, however crucial it is today.* ## Conclusion: an Alliance learning to manage its own contradictions ### The real test will be execution, not declaration The **Ankara** **summit** will produce neither spectacular ruptures nor major policy shifts, and that is precisely its strength: after years of promises, it is time for the concrete delivery of real military capabilities (The Chicago Council on Global Affairs). The question is no longer whether Europe will spend more, but whether it will quickly turn these billions into operational combat capabilities. For the West, every contract signed, every billion invested in the transatlantic **defense** industry is a **deterrence** message sent simultaneously to **Russia**, **China**, **Iran**, and **North Korea**. ### Why this fragile unity deserves to be defended A short format, a concise statement, an American president handled carefully but engaged: this imperfect formula remains infinitely preferable to a publicly divided **Alliance**. History may judge certain concessions made to **Trump** harshly, but it will above all remember that **NATO**, once again, managed to turn its internal tensions into operational cohesion against its strategic adversaries. **Ankara** will not be a historic summit in the history books, but it could well be the one where the **Alliance** definitively chose quiet effectiveness over pointless grandiloquence. *I close with a simple conviction: a pragmatic NATO, one that prefers contracts to communiqués and results to grandstanding, is exactly what the West needs against adversaries who, for their part, know none of these democratic hesitations.* **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 - RTL Today — How NATO will try to keep Trump happy at the Ankara summit, July 3, 2026 - Anadolu Ajansı — Factbox: NATO defense spending where allies stand ahead of Ankara summit, July 1, 2026 - Reuters — NATO leaders affirm ironclad commitment to collective defence, Ankara summit text, July 3, 2026 ### Secondary sources - Channel News Asia — NATO support for Ukraine at Ankara summit - Wikipedia — 2026 Ankara NATO summit - CNBC — NATO 3.0: spending commitments face the Trump test, July 6, 2026 - Time Magazine — Trump calls current US support for NATO ridiculous, July 3, 2026 --- Source: Maxime Marquette, MadMax. When citing, name the author and link https://mad-max.co/en/article/pourquoi-le-sommet-ecourte-d-ankara-est-une-victoire-pour-l-otan