ANKARA and WASHINGTON—Air Force One and other leaders’ planes touched down in the Turkish capital today as heads of state and government gathered for this year’s NATO Summit. Yet even with all the aircraft safely on the ground, there could still be turbulence ahead.
In the run-up to the summit, US President Donald Trump cast aspersions on the allies and said that he would have skipped the gathering altogether were it not for his fondness for the host country’s controversial leader, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.
Fortunately, there are several steps NATO leaders can take at the summit to get the Alliance back on the right track.
“Get out alive”
There was reason to believe that this year’s NATO Summit would be smooth sailing. Last year’s summit in The Hague saw all NATO allies make a historic pledge to spend 5 percent of their gross domestic product (GDP) on defense, and many allies are following through.
For several weeks now, however, there have been flashing warning signs that the Alliance could be headed for a difficult summit in Ankara. This year’s meeting comes as tensions between the United States and its Canadian and European allies reach a boiling point.
Trump has criticized European allies for not doing enough to support US Operation Epic Fury in Iran, calling NATO a “paper tiger.” Trump recently suggested that the United States could still reconsider its NATO membership. These remarks followed repeated US threats to seek ownership over Greenland, leading Europeans to question the United States’ commitment to NATO’s Article 5 mutual defense pledge.
This political churn has been accompanied by a series of US force posture announcements to cancel, delay, or withdraw troops assigned to the European theater, which have left many officials across allied capitals searching for clarity. In a June 3 announcement, US European Command said that it would reduce the forces and capabilities available to NATO during a crisis. At the NATO Defense Ministerial the same month, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth announced a six-month “NATO 3.0” review of US military forces and basing in Europe, suggesting that more US posture changes are likely.
The timing of these announcements could not be worse. Not only is Russia continuing its aggression against Ukraine, but Moscow is also stepping up its campaign of hybrid attacks and intimidation against European allies.
The European side of the ledger also gives cause for concern. Inflation is already outpacing the increases in new defense spending in some European capitals. The United States views EU efforts to spend money on Europe’s capability development as excluding US industry at a time when the European defense market is too fragmented to ramp up at the necessary speed and scale. While allied leaders tell us that they want to recreate that “warm and fuzzy feeling” they had leaving the Hague, this year’s summit could be riddled with disappointment.
In June, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the Ankara summit as “probably the most important meeting in NATO’s history, because there are some things here that need to be cleared up and fixed.” One senior official told us that NATO’s goal for the summit should be merely to “get out alive.”
Strong, happy, and at bay
So, what can allies do to ensure that NATO’s Ankara summit is a success?
First, every ally must show demonstrable progress toward reaching, and a credible plan to achieve, the 5 percent of GDP defense spending benchmark. This is perhaps the most tangible sign of burden sharing, and one that generations of US leaders have sought from their European and Canadian allies.
On this indicator, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has a good news story to tell. In 2025, NATO projected that all thirty-two allies would meet or exceed the pre-Hague summit target of investing at least 2 percent of GDP in defense, with three countries already spending at least 3.5 percent on core defenses—nearly a decade ahead of the 2035 deadline. European and Canadian NATO allies also increased defense spending by 20 percent in real terms compared to the prior year—a considerable achievement.
Second, allies must show that they are turning defense dollars into real capabilities. Ideally, allies would announce in Ankara new contracts for transatlantic co-production and co-development modeled on the F-35 fighter jet, which is manufactured through a globally integrated supply chain with major components produced across the United States and partner nations. New examples of collaboration on combat-ready capabilities and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence could also help NATO accelerate weapons deliveries to warfighters.
Third, NATO should back Ukraine while supporting US-led diplomatic efforts to negotiate an end to the war. This will require long-term financial commitments and faster delivery of weapons to Ukraine. Moreover, NATO allies should look to Ukrainian innovation as a model to strengthen Europe’s own rearmament, by advancing joint production with Ukrainian companies and integrating NATO supply chains with Ukrainian factories.
Fourth, European leaders should avoid gratuitous criticisms of the Trump administration. Regardless of their feelings toward the US president, it is more important now than ever to keep any disagreements behind closed doors.