NATO summit – Less than two weeks before NATO’s Ankara summit on July 7-8, NATO’s deputy supreme allied commander in Europe is pushing leaders to deliver visible unity—more defense spending, renewed support for Ukraine, and credible plans amid uncertainty over U.S. forces i
When NATO leaders gather in Turkey on July 7-8, the stakes will not be measured only in speeches. Air Chief Marshal Sir John Stringer. NATO’s deputy supreme allied commander in Europe. says the summit’s real test is whether the alliance can display cohesion through action—at a moment when allies are already bracing for shifting expectations from Washington.
Stringer. speaking in London less than two weeks before the Ankara meeting. framed the summit as a highly political moment and “a demonstration of any organization’s unity.” He also acknowledged the tension simmering beneath the schedule. “Are we in one of those moments at the moment?. Yes. we are. ” he said at a military conference in London. where The Associated Press also interviewed other senior European military officials about their hopes—and fears—for the summit.
The push for unity is tied to a clear set of aims: spur member countries to spend more on defense, reaffirm support for Ukraine, and underline that NATO is standing together while Russia poses a growing threat to Europe.
Stringer’s comments land amid noise coming from the United States about its posture in Europe. U.S. President Donald Trump has sent conflicting signals at different times about whether America would stay in Europe. including threatening to leave while also unnerving European leaders with his push to annex Greenland and with his flattery of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The uncertainty has only sharpened after U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth lambasted NATO allies last week for not allowing use of their bases to attack Iran. At the same time, he announced a surprise six-month review of American forces in Europe. In the United Kingdom. government ministers have quit over what they said are military spending plans that fail to keep Britain safe.
For many European defense officials, the core concern is not only spending, but credibility—whether leaders will translate pledges into capabilities.
Maj. Gen. Indrek Sirel. a commander in Estonia’s armed forces. argued that Russia’s increasing threat to Europe means allies should boost their own militaries while also helping Ukraine degrade Russia’s fighting power. Brig. Gen. Jyri Raitasalo. Finland’s deputy logistics chief and a commander whose country shares NATO’s longest border with Russia. said Europe must be credible against Russia.
Stringer pointed to industrial effort as one sign NATO is trying to move beyond statements. He cited how some NATO countries are quadrupling production of 155 mm artillery shells. The summit, he said, will discuss ramping up production in ways the alliance has not had to do in decades.
But European military officials say the hardest question is how fast they may be forced to shoulder more responsibility if U.S. capabilities in Europe change.
The six-month review announced by Hegseth is expected to shape the pace and scale of Europe’s response. Earlier, the U.S. military in Europe had said Washington would be withdrawing some capabilities from Europe and expecting other allies to fill the gaps.
The Trump administration has said troop reductions in Europe have long been planned and coordinated with allies. but uncertainty remains over what any changes mean on the ground. Raitasalo said it was still not clear how U.S. forces would be positioned in the Baltic states, including U.S.-led deterrence of Russia on NATO’s eastern flank.
Sirel said he was “confident” he could rely on a U.S. presence, while also saying the Estonian military is finding ways to react to sudden changes.
Stringer described a more complicated balance. He said it would be difficult to replace U.S. long-range strike and surveillance capabilities, but added that allies could bridge any gap—though not necessarily with the same equipment. He said NATO could combine a “cocktail” of capabilities to compensate.
Only the U.S., he said, operates B1 and B52 bomber aircraft. In theory, he said, any loss of those capabilities might be offset by firing missiles from a variety of other systems, including from the ground, sea, and smaller aircraft.
Still, Europeans are wary of how quickly plans may be altered.
Raitasalo recalled that NATO allies were bewildered in May when Trump said he would send 5,000 U.S. troops to Poland just weeks after ordering the same number pulled from Europe. For military planning, that kind of sudden pivot is more than a political headache. Raitasalo said military planning requires long-term strategy. and that if officials change their minds too often—every week. every month. or even every year—“you will not get very good results.”.
He said allies need clear pledges of capabilities rather than promises that stop at spending announcements.
Sweden’s army chief, Maj. Gen. Jonny Lindfors. said a good outcome from the summit would be “a common picture of how to realign when it comes to deterrence and defense.” Lindfors said he would like at least an outline—if not a “clear vision”—on how defense burdens should shift so that he can understand what “NATO 3.0 is starting to look like.”.
For Britain, the question of “credible plans” is no longer theoretical.
British Defense Secretary John Healey resigned earlier this month. along with another minister. saying the government was unable and unwilling to commit the resources Britain needs “defend the country at this time of rising threats.” At last year’s NATO summit. members agreed to spend 3.5% of their gross domestic product on core defense. and the U.K. committed to meeting that target by 2035. But Healey said the proposed defense investment plan would see spending rise to just 2.68% of GDP in 2030.
Dan Jarvis, who is now Britain’s defense secretary, has said the country will keep its commitments. The British government has also committed to publishing the spending plan.
Stringer said that by the summit, NATO expects nations to have a “credible path” to 3.5%, and that the U.K. is “as beholden to that as anybody else.” He said Britain cannot rely on “thought leadership” in NATO alone, and must pair it with “forces and resources” while committing to defense.
Stringer and other European officials repeatedly returned to the same warning: the alliance’s credibility is on the line.
At last year’s summit. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte kept Trump on board by telling him he would achieve “BIG” success in getting allies to spend more on defense. This year. Stringer said. the summit must show “cohesion and unity” among NATO’s 32 members while also allowing “honest” conversations and delivering “credible” plans.
Raitasalo said the meeting must go beyond traditional “communiques, roadmaps and action plans” and demonstrate deterrence through deeds. If NATO members do not step up and turn promises into action, he said, the “credibility” of the alliance is at stake.
The sequence of concerns is tied together by timing: the July 7-8 summit is close enough that military leaders feel the pressure to move from planning to proof—especially if U.S. decisions and European budgets are still in motion. In that atmosphere. unity will be measured in what leaders leave Ankara with: not just agreements. but commitments backed by production. positioning. and the capability to deter Russia.
NATO summit Turkey July 7-8 NATO unity defense spending 3.5% GDP support for Ukraine U.S. forces in Europe Ankara summit Air Chief Marshal Sir John Stringer Pete Hegseth review Estonia Finland United Kingdom defense spending