Tensions at the NATO Summit in Türkiye: Is the Alliance Coming to a Breaking Point?

The NATO summit held in Ankara this week is witnessing one of the most critical periods in the alliance's history. At the two-day meeting attended by the heads of state of 32 member countries, the repercussions of the war in Ukraine and the Iran conflict are among the main agenda items. However, before the summit even began, US President Donald Trump's harsh statements towards allies turned the agenda upside down. Trump stated that it was absurd for the US to maintain a non-reciprocal relationship, claiming that European countries did not stand by America in tough times. This rhetoric is interpreted as the biggest crisis that directly threatens the future of the transatlantic military alliance and will cast a shadow over the summit.

NATO officials announced that the summit will focus on three priorities: increasing defense investments, expanding the European defense industrial base, and providing long-term military support to Ukraine. Last year, allies pledged to allocate a percent of their gross domestic products to defense, and in 2025 alone, defense investments in Europe and Canada increased nominally by 139 billion dollars. Nevertheless, President Trump's threats to withdraw the US from NATO and pull its soldiers and weapons out of the continent complicate all diplomatic efforts. The Pentagon's announcement in May of its decision to withdraw approximately 5,000 soldiers from Germany further fuels these concerns. Experts from the German Marshall Fund emphasize that the alliance is not entirely at a breaking point, but is entering a deep period of adaptation and transition.

While Trump's skepticism towards NATO is not a new situation, the recent conflict with Iran has further inflamed tensions within the alliance. The US President is harshly criticizing European allies for not militarily supporting Washington, particularly for refusing to participate in efforts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Military spending remains one of the biggest points of friction between countries. Trump describes it as absolute 'nonsense' that the US spends the most money in NATO to protect other countries while getting no benefits in return. This situation carries the risk of the meetings turning into a political dispute rather than focusing on military strategy.

Experts acknowledge that the US attitude towards NATO has changed significantly, but state that the possibility of the country completely withdrawing from the alliance is low due to legal and political obstacles. This formality, which requires a two-thirds majority in the US Senate or a law from Congress, is a scenario that is difficult to realize in the short term, especially considering the upcoming critical midterm elections. Broad segments of both major parties in Washington agree on remaining active in European security and maintaining the key role in NATO. Still, analysts from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace state that Europeans have lost hope of regaining the alliance-based trust that has lasted for decades.

The sole expectation of European leaders from this summit is to draw a more predictable road map during this challenging transition process. Europe has accepted that the US commitment to the continent has changed; all they want now is for this transition to take place in as orderly and controlled a manner as possible. Experts warn that a potential hiccup in the transition from US leadership to European leadership could result in a serious deterrence and defense gap. On the other hand, the vulnerability of the European defense industry has been exposed following Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and the search for strategic autonomy by European countries has accelerated. The fact remains that Europe, which increased its defense spending by 62 percent between 2020 and 2025, is still heavily dependent on the US in critical areas such as intelligence, logistics, and long-range strike capabilities.