This year, the NATO Summit is taking place on June 24–25 in The Hague. Against the backdrop of numerous security crises, during a particularly challenging time for allies – the so-called period of transatlantic upheavals – member states have sought to maintain unity and resolve in ensuring future security. Under the pressure of the transactional policies of the U.S. administration, which fuel rifts between neoliberal and isolationist forces within NATO member states, the contours of unity within the Alliance are becoming increasingly blurred. That is why the Summit in The Hague is an essential part of the broader puzzle of ensuring European security and strengthening transatlantic defense cooperation.
The priority topics discussed on the sidelines of the Summit focus on: NATO’s financial resources and defense capabilities to respond to threats and challenges, collective security and deterrence, and the strengthening of land, sea, and air defense capacities of member states. The first day of the NATO Summit in The Hague included working sessions of the North Atlantic Council in defense ministers’ format, the NATO-Ukraine Council in foreign ministers’ format, as well as important discussions by NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte with allies and partners, including a joint meeting with President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President of the European Council António Costa, and President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen. The second day of the summit continues with a meeting of NATO heads of state and government, where important decisions are being discussed to strengthen the Alliance, transatlantic security, and the maintenance of peace and stability.
Rising Defense Spending: “Quantum Leap” or “Numbers Game”?
For the United States, this Summit is focused on increasing allies’ defense spending to 5% of GDP. According to former U.S. President Donald Trump, European leaders are not investing enough in defense, while new threats and challenges require greater funding. Statements from the U.S. side indicating that the new administration no longer intends to bear the financial burden alone and will shift it to European partners were received differently among NATO members. While the new large-scale investment plan in defense will undoubtedly bring dividends and prove justified in terms of enhancing member states’ defense capabilities, one sensitive issue remains: how economically feasible is it for NATO members? Moreover, the U.S. President, ahead of the Summit, openly spoke about the possibility of differing interpretations of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty. This not only causes concern among allies but also raises a legitimate question: How does the U.S. envision upholding collective security? To what extent is it possible for member states to unite around a shared defense policy while avoiding disagreements among the 32 allies?
The so-called “quantum leap” in collective defense to 5% of GDP envisions 3.5% of GDP being directed toward investments in NATO members’ defense capabilities – particularly in strengthening air defense, military equipment, armored vehicles, artillery ammunition, and defense industry development. Speaking at the NATO Defense Industry Forum, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte urged allies to expand their defense industrial bases, noting that “supply is insufficient to meet our growing demand on both sides of the Atlantic.” “By investing more and producing more, we are building a stronger NATO,” he emphasized.
The 5% target is expected to be included in the final statement of the summit and become the price Europeans must pay to retain Washington’s favor. At the same time, the Secretary General has set an ambitious timeline for reaching this goal – the year 2032. Considering that Russia will continue to pose a threat to European security in the coming years, and the U.S. is currently reassessing its military presence in Europe while increasingly focusing on the Indo-Pacific region, it becomes extremely important for the U.S. to gradually reposition its troops to give European allies time to fill in the resulting defense gaps. European countries have also placed new emphasis on nuclear deterrence in response to Russia’s nuclear threats and continued heavy investment in the modernization of its nuclear forces through hypersonic missiles and underwater drones. Although Trump did not remove any nuclear weapons from Europe, concerns over dependence on the U.S. and the reliability of extended U.S. deterrence have prompted European calls to strengthen their own nuclear deterrent capabilities.
Assistance to Ukraine: Air Defense Systems, New Weaponry, and Additional Sanctions against Russia
One of the central topics of the summit is the war in Ukraine and support for the country, which remains in an extremely difficult position, especially considering the current situation on the front lines and Russian advances. Russia shows no genuine interest in a ceasefire, and short-term agreements will not lead to any substantial change.
On the summit’s sidelines, NATO Secretary General, the President of Ukraine, and leaders of France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and the UK met for consultations. In a joint briefing, the NATO Secretary General, the President of the European Council, the President of the European Commission, and the President of Ukraine shared their expectations from the summit.
Mark Rutte, NATO Secretary General: “I cannot reveal anything about the summit statement, but we can confidently assume that it will include key wording on Ukraine and future financial support. This is important, because what we have witnessed in the past two weeks is unacceptable.” António Costa, President of the European Council: “Russia’s invasion of Ukraine remains a serious threat to global peace, as it undermines the rules-based international order. Russia is an intercontinental country stretching from Europe to the Pacific and acting in partnership with regimes such as North Korea and Iran. A just and lasting peace in Ukraine is urgently needed, and I am deeply disappointed that Russia is not participating in efforts led by President Zelenskyy.”
Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission: “We just discussed how important it is for Ukraine to invest in its defense industry – extraordinary, flexible, and innovative. That’s why we created the 150-billion-euro SAFE funding program, which allows member states, Ukraine, and other partners to access funding for investments in Ukraine’s defense industry, which has demonstrated the ability for innovation, rapid, reliable, and large-scale production. We have much to learn from you in this regard, and we support you to ensure Ukraine’s survival.”
Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President of Ukraine: “We need air defense systems, and we still have partner support in this direction. We are even counting on joint production and greater military assistance.” Ukraine’s defense – made possible by Western assistance in response to Russia’s aggression – offers key lessons on the urgent need to rapidly develop air capabilities, paired with technological innovation and reliability. That’s why NATO’s role in defense industry development across member states is critical. Behind closed doors, Ukraine’s delegation admitted it is among friends but without guarantees, and progress in NATO-Ukraine relations is unlikely. What Ukraine needs most are air defense systems, advanced weapons, and additional sanctions against Russia.
The Pressure Increases: Multiple Conflicts and Security Challenges
The summit also addressed the conflict between Israel and Iran. At a press conference, U.S. President Donald Trump stated that U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities ended the war between Israel and Iran. He said Iran is now focused on rebuilding after the recent attack and emphasized that any attempt by Iran to develop nuclear weapons would be met with military force: “I believe Iran’s nuclear program has been delayed by decades.”
Meanwhile, Black Sea security remains a major concern for countries in the region. Romanian President Nicușor Dan called for greater attention to the Eastern Flank and the Black Sea region, which he described as strategically vital for Euro-Atlantic security. He also reaffirmed Romania’s long-term support for Ukraine and other countries under Russian threat, particularly the Republic of Moldova.
All European leaders acknowledge the existing security risks. The shared understanding of the importance of preserving NATO’s core values – which have underpinned the alliance for decades – is crucial, but it is complicated by the unpredictable nature of U.S. foreign policy, which creates additional political risks for all allies. That’s why this summit is seen as historically significant: to define the terms and agreements that will shape future transatlantic security, uphold NATO’s authority as a defensive alliance, and seek compromise solutions in light of the transatlantic shocks affecting member states.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Foreign Policy Association.
