WASHINGTON—The day after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, NATO leaders held a virtual summit. Each year since then, heads of state and government from Alliance members have met. Each year, too, Ukraine has been on the agenda. In the communiqué following The Hague summit last year, for example, allies reaffirmed their commitment to provide support to Ukraine.
Ukraine will once again feature on the agenda of the upcoming NATO Summit in Ankara—Secretary General Mark Rutte said as much in his June 25 speech at the Atlantic Council. In Ankara, allies will have a have a chance to show the significant progress they have made in the past year in, for example, increasing their defense spending and sending aid to Ukraine. But they should also use the summit as an opportunity to press more European allies to participate in the Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL) program.
A program that works
PURL was set up as an alternative to direct US military aid shipments to Ukraine, which the Trump administration wound down after coming into office in 2025. Under PURL, Ukraine identifies its capability gaps, European states and Canada provide funding, and US industry supplies the capabilities, primarily air-defense systems. Since its inception in July 2025, PURL has proven remarkably successful in supplying Ukraine with critical weapon systems. So far, twenty-six countries have sent more than four billion dollars’ worth of military aid through PURL.
But just a small handful of nations have made most of these contributions, and it is becoming difficult for Ukraine to repeatedly approach these benefactors while there are allies that have so far contributed little or nothing. At present, there are six NATO members (France, Italy, Turkey, Czechia, Hungary, and Slovakia) that have not contributed to PURL, and some of their stated reasons do not add up.
To be clear, European states already bear the brunt of total aid to Ukraine. As of 2025, Europe has provided more than $227 billion in total aid, compared to around $131 billion from the United States, most of which came in 2022. Ukraine’s battlefield successes in recent months are not solely the result of US weapon shipments. But PURL serves a distinct role, which more of Europe should acknowledge, of providing critical capabilities.
PURL exists to fill capability gaps that only US military equipment can fill. European industry, for example, cannot yet close the air-defense gap. The US defense industrial base is at present the only source capable of supplying these systems at scale, as Joint European-Ukrainian efforts to develop a Patriot replacement will not bear fruit until 2027. Similarly, the Franco-Italian SAMP/T lacks the production capacity to supplant the Patriot system in the near-term. US air-defense systems remain vital to Ukraine’s security, and PURL is the only mechanism through which Ukraine can receive them after the Trump administration’s decision to stop supplying Ukraine with equipment directly from US stocks. Despite the potential for US weapon shipment delays due to the war in Iran, PURL has remained largely unaffected, and munitions have continued to flow to Ukraine.
Convincing the holdouts
Led by France, some PURL holdouts prefer European “strategic autonomy” over reliance on the United States. Other programs, such as the Czech ammunition effort, aim to route aid to Ukraine around US aid entirely. These arguments miss the point. Contributing to PURL is not a concession to permanent US dependence. PURL is a temporary stopgap, acting as a bridge until European industrial capacity develops further. In this context, not joining PURL is a political statement rather than a practical strategy.
Italy has cited ceasefire talks with Russia as its reason for abstaining. Turkey has similarly used its diplomatic role as a mediator to justify it staying on the sidelines. Neither argument holds up, as negotiations have made no progress and Moscow’s air war on Ukraine intensifies. Russian President Vladimir Putin has shown no interest in serious negotiations until he achieves a battlefield breakthrough. Invoking diplomacy as a reason to withhold PURL support gives Russia room to press its offensive in the Donbas.
Hungary’s previous prime minister, Viktor Orbán, had a soft spot for Putin, effectively preventing the country from supporting Ukraine with military aid. Orbán’s recent electoral defeat has already begun a shift in Budapest’s support for Kyiv. The Slovakian governing coalition has shown deference to Russia, as well. This approach toward Russia has not only kept these nations from utilizing PURL, but also from providing meaningful support to Ukraine more broadly. Russian aggression is not solely a Ukrainian problem, but a European one, and ignoring this only emboldens Putin to pursue his aims to exert influence in eastern Europe.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has stated that Ukraine needs fifteen billion dollars in PURL contributions this year. The upcoming NATO Summit in Ankara is the ideal opportunity to bring new PURL members into the fold, especially since assistance to Ukraine is one of the priorities for leaders at the summit.
In the final days before the summit, major contributors such as Norway, Germany, and the Netherlands should press France and Italy to commit to the program. These two allies have proven to be two of Ukraine’s largest supporters through other means, indicating that their support for PURL might be easier to secure. Bringing France and Italy onboard PURL could go a long way toward demonstrating genuine NATO unity.
It will be more difficult to convince Slovakia and Turkey. The Slovakian government has shown no movement on its stance toward Ukraine, and Turkey is unlikely take any action that it might see as jeopardizing its mediation role. While these nations joining PURL would be a major win for NATO unity, effort is better spent on more receptive nations.
The question marks are Czechia and Hungary. Czechia has expressed interest in joining PURL but has yet to commit. Recent PURL entrants, such as the United Kingdom, which began pledging assistance in February of this year, should have the opportunity to share their perspectives and get the commitment over the line. The summit will also give leaders a place to gauge the extent of new Hungarian Prime Minister Péter Magyar’s stated openness to helping Ukraine.