Debate is a hallmark of democracy, and a sign of strength. As world leaders gather for the NATO summit in Ankara in July, it’s important to remember that the alliance adapts when allies discuss change openly and directly.
Debate and disagreement aren’t signs of weakness, but of dialogue. And in this moment, in a volatile environment, where active conflicts and domestic political polarization in many NATO nations are complicating global geopolitics, the alliance can, and must, change.
At this Summit, allies can leverage this changing strategic environment and adapt through serious deliberation to make the operational shifts that the alliance requires to move into the future… and better explain the importance of NATO to a skeptical public.
In the lead-up to the 36th formal summit, headlines across the world will try to weave a story of tension and uncertainty. Pundits will outline allies’ perceived divisions over Iran and Ukraine, Europe’s responsibility within NATO, and public concerns about unity, including questions on the U.S. commitment to the alliance. But the alliance must put difficult conversations “on the table instead of tiptoeing around them,” as NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte argued this spring at the Reagan National Defense Forum.
While real urgency shapes this summit, history shows that there have been other periods when NATO confronted questions about its relevance, its utility, and its future: In 2006, in Latvia, the allies faced questions on relevance and unity in light of domestic politics. In 2014, as allies gathered in Wales, analysts dismissed NATO’s strategic planning and commitment to action. In 2018, some pundits worried about the future of NATO as pressure mounted for allies to increase defense spending,
Today, it’s abundantly clear – and in the public narrative – that the perennial burden-sharing conversation is no longer theoretical. Russia’s continued aggression against Ukraine, instability in the Middle East, growing Chinese ambitions, and emerging threat domains including cyber, disinformation, and vulnerable supply chains have fundamentally altered the geopolitical landscape.
NATO – as it has in the past – must adapt. And it will.
NATO’s new defense spending target, agreed at the 2025 summit in The Hague, requires allies to invest 5% of gross domestic product (GDP) on core defense and broader security by 2035, with a minimum of 3.5% of GDP for core military defense. The remaining 1.5% is designated for broader security investments, including civil preparedness and cyber defense, among other aspects.
All 32 allies meet the prior 2% guideline established in 2014; the challenge now is to meet the new target. And progress is being made: European defense investment has increased substantially since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Germany’s Zeitenwende foreign and security policy, Poland’s investment in its military modernization, and expanded Nordic defense cooperation reflect the European understanding that robust deterrence requires not only readiness but investment and domestic political will.
European allies have been explicit, as has Secretary General Rutte, in acknowledging – and taking concrete steps – to carry more responsibility for collective defense. This isn’t because the United States is abandoning NATO, but because a stronger Europe makes this strong alliance stronger.
That progress should be recognized at the Ankara summit, but as in the past, the gathering will also provide the forum and the space for honest conversations about other topics, such as capability gaps for military operations, industrial capacity for manufacturing of defense equipment, and force posture, the disposition and readiness of the alliance’s military forces.
Again, despite what our adversaries may try to promote, these discussions aren’t a threat to NATO cohesion, but essential to preserving it.
The summit is a platform to discuss the future of the alliance. NATO is the most successful political-military alliance in the world precisely because it has adapted across generations of threats, from the Cold War to terrorism to today’s increasing multipolar, and multithreat, world. Adaptation keeps NATO relevant and vital to our global security.
We need to tell that story. The alliance cannot rely on institutional memory or assumptions of automatic public support; walk into any university classroom today in Europe and North America – young people today not only didn’t experience the Cold War, they also weren’t alive on 9/11.
When our citizens ask why NATO still matters, what collective defense means in practical terms, and why deterrence remains necessary, all allies – including the United States – must be able to explain in concrete, strategic terms.
The fact is that NATO safeguards the stability that underpins economic growth, democratic resilience, global trade, and security for our citizens in 2026, just as when it was founded in 1949. The alliance deters aggression, reassures partners, and is the clearest demonstration that unity carries weight in a dangerous world.
Allies must explain again and again, consistently and credibly, that NATO matters to taxpayers. The summit in Ankara provides this opportunity – not through performative unity, but with honesty, strategic clarity, and visible and tangible commitments to adapt.
