TRENDS Global, part of TRENDS Group, organized a virtual panel discussion titled NATO After Ankara: Priorities, Pressures, and the Road Ahead through its virtual offices in Türkiye and Belgium. The discussion brought together leading experts and specialists to examine NATO’s evolving security priorities, regional challenges, and the alliance’s future direction.
Türkiye’s Growing Strategic Weight
The discussion, moderated by TRENDS researcher Mouza Al-Mheiri, opened with remarks by Dr. Serhat Çubukçuoğlu, Senior Researcher and Director of the TRENDS Türkiye Virtual Office, who said that Türkiye’s strategic weight within NATO is rising structurally, rather than merely rhetorically. He attributed this shift to the United States’ growing focus on extended nuclear deterrence in the Indo-Pacific and its push for the European Union and Canada to assume greater responsibility for the conventional defense of European territory under what he described as “NATO 3.0”.
Çubukçuoğlu added that Türkiye’s bargaining power rests on its geography as well as its substantive defense, industrial, and operational capabilities, reinforced by the decision to resume close defense cooperation with the United States. Nevertheless, Türkiye’s gains are likely to remain issue-specific and conditional rather than resulting in full institutional parity within NATO, as Ankara seeks to preserve its strategic autonomy and multidirectional foreign policy rather than become fully integrated into EU and U.S. priorities.
Maritime Security Capabilities
Gina Bou Serhal, Senior Researcher and Director of the TRENDS Belgium Virtual Office, explained that the Ankara Summit marked the first-ever meeting between NATO’s leadership and the foreign ministers of all Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI) countries. She said this signaled a shift from symbolic political dialogue toward tangible cooperation focused on maritime security capabilities, counter-drone measures, chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) defense, and counterterrorism.
Bou Serhal noted that the Iran war exposed the limits of NATO’s commitment in the Gulf region. The summit declaration devoted only a few sentences to Iran, including opposition to Iran’s nuclear program and an affirmation of freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz. She described these statements as largely rhetorical and lacking concrete action, particularly given that Iran had demonstrated its ability to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz in the face of little deterrence.
Lack of Joint Procurement
Juraj Majcin, Defense and Security Policy Analyst at the European Policy Center in Brussels, said that the “Europeanization of NATO” means Europeans and Canadians assuming greater responsibility for conventional defense. He noted that the Ankara Summit produced major announcements, including new airborne early warning aircraft and U.S. drones, but that these capabilities would not actually become available until 2030.
Majcin identified the lack of joint procurement as a key structural problem. National defense ministries receiving additional funding often have fewer incentives to procure jointly with other European countries, despite EU programs such as the €150 billion SAFE initiative, which seek to aggregate demand. He added that financing capacities nevertheless vary considerably across countries.
Continued U.S. Dominance
The discussion concluded with remarks by Megan Gisclon, Managing Editor and Researcher at Sabancı University’s Istanbul Policy Center, who argued that the United States will remain the dominant power within NATO despite increased European defense spending. Europe and Canada still account for only around 40-45 percent of NATO’s total budget, while procedural power within the alliance continues to run through Washington.
Gisclon explained that the language on Iran in the Ankara Summit declaration reflects the considerable political weight the United States continues to wield in shaping the alliance’s priorities, even though Iran technically lies outside NATO’s area of operations. She added that U.S. foreign policy under Donald Trump is characterized by a contradiction, with an “America First” approach coexisting with continued direct U.S. strikes against Iran.
