After a 22-year hiatus, the leaders of NATO member states are once again convening in Türkiye. The Ankara summit is poised to be one of the most critical turning points in NATO’s 77-year history, serving as the threshold for a new era where the alliance’s future roadmap will be delineated.

The most critical agenda item of the upcoming Ankara summit is the adaptation of the alliance to the emerging global order and the formulation of a new strategic doctrine.

Prior to the summit, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan highlighted the imperative for institutional revision, saying, "Today's world is not a continuation of the old world in which NATO was founded. A new world has been established, and within this new global architecture, NATO’s positioning must be fundamentally different."

In this context, Türkiye is charting a course not merely as a host nation, but as the actor best equipped to evaluate the contemporary risks facing NATO and the prerequisites of this new era. Shifting away from its Cold War role of solely safeguarding NATO’s southern flank, Türkiye has ascended to a position of vital, global strategic importance for the alliance.

The motto of Türkiye’s inclusive foreign policy vision is defined as "an effective Türkiye, both on the ground and at the negotiating table." This vision transitions Türkiye from a state that merely reacts to external actions to a primary decision-making actor.

When evaluating its critical defense industry, extensive cultural hinterland, military readiness, highly experienced armed forces, and geographic advantages, Türkiye stands at the epicenter of the geopolitics of the Middle East, the Caucasus, the Balkans, the Black Sea, the Mediterranean and beyond. Particularly regarding the balancing of Russia in the Black Sea and the restoration of European security in the post-Russia-Ukraine War era, Türkiye provides indispensable contributions, not only through its conventional military prowess but also via its dynamic defense industry.

Furthermore, Türkiye acts as the primary stabilizer in the Middle East and the Caucasus. The stabilization of these volatile regions remains a strategic priority for the United States, especially as the U.S. administration under President Donald Trump seeks to shift its geopolitical pivot toward the Asia-Pacific region.

Why NATO 3.0?

Transcending the classical logic of continental expansion observed in the post-Cold War era, NATO has adopted a doctrine of strategic expansion through global partnerships, which is the clearest indicator of NATO 3.0. The invitation of Gulf states such as Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), alongside Asia-Pacific nations including Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand, underscores NATO’s institutional resolve to project power and play a decisive role on a global scale.

Following the end of the Cold War, NATO adapted to a unipolar world under U.S. hegemony by pivoting toward counterterrorism and asymmetric threats. Today, in response to shifting global equilibria, the alliance is reconfiguring itself for a multipolar international system. The institutional evolution of the alliance since its inception marks three major paradigm shifts:

NATO was established to counter the risk of Soviet expansion into Europe following World War II. Therefore, the NATO 1.0 era started in 1949 with the erection of the "Iron Curtain" between the Soviet Union and the Atlantic bloc, and concluded with the end of the Cold War.

Starting in 1990 and initiated by the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the fall of the Berlin Wall, the NATO 2.0 phase adopted a security paradigm predicated on counterterrorism and crisis management.

Presently, NATO has proven inadequate in the face of conventional warfare. This systemic vulnerability can only be rectified by sustainably increasing industrial production capacity. Thus, the alliance is transforming into a new strategic platform encompassing defense production capabilities, technological hegemony, corridor warfare and regional resilience. This transformation marks the beginning of NATO 3.0.

The fact that the summit formalizing the NATO 3.0 transformation is being held in Ankara demonstrates that Türkiye has moved beyond its Cold War role as a southern flank guardian or its post-Cold War role as a significant partner. It has now risen to a central position in both European defense and NATO’s global calculus. The operational codes of this new era are encapsulated in four pillars: "rapid, agile, productive and continuous deterrence."

Trajectory changed in Alaska

The summit’s agenda rests on three primary pillars: the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war since 2022, the adversarial environment between the U.S. and Iran, and the systemic uncertainty generated by President Trump’s stance on the defense spending plans of NATO member states.

For European nations caught unprepared for the second Trump administration, the Ankara summit will fundamentally represent a "make or break" dilemma. Nevertheless, Russia and China will demonstrably remain at the forefront of the leaders' agenda as core strategic threats to NATO.

At a juncture where the Russia-Ukraine war is deepening and harboring Cold War-level risks, the posture of the Trump administration is reflected in the outcomes of the "Alaska Summit," which altered the trajectory of relations with Russia. This summit also held profound implications for U.S.-European relations, which became strained following the bilateral meeting between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Consequently, the potential withdrawal of U.S. forces from European bases remains on the agenda, with efforts being made to implement equitable burden-sharing frameworks.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte characterized the convention as a "summit of accountability," emphasizing that member states must translate their pledges to increase military expenditures into quantifiable, concrete data rather than mere rhetoric. At the Ankara summit, allies are expected to present concrete implementation plans outlining how they will increase their defense expenditures.

Since French President Emmanuel Macron famously declared NATO was "brain-dead" in 2019, the European wing of NATO has failed to advance the concept of an EU Army beyond mere rhetoric. Furthermore, it has been unable to anchor the European security architecture within a framework more tangible than credit-based mechanisms such as the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) program.

As a new global architecture is constructed, no strategic design is viable without the inclusion of Türkiye. Pointing to this reality, Belgian Defense Minister Theo Francken said that "Türkiye must be integrated into the European Union's SAFE-2 program. Excluding Türkiye from SAFE-1 was a strategic error. We have a great deal to learn from Türkiye's technological advancements."

As contemporary warfare concepts continue to undergo a rapid transformation driven by asymmetric threats and unmanned defense ecosystems, Türkiye produces advanced systems fully compliant with NATO Standardization Agreements (STANAG).

Within the domain of unmanned aerial systems, the prominent spearhead of the Turkish defense industry, platforms such as Kızılelma, Akıncı, TB3, and Anka-3 are projected to occupy increasingly vital roles within the alliance. Furthermore, the Bayraktar TB2 UCAVs (unmanned combat aerial vehicles), which have already been integrated into the inventories of NATO allies like Poland and Romania, have become core components reinforcing the defensive shield along the alliance's eastern flank. Concurrently, Kaan, Türkiye's indigenous 5th-generation national combat aircraft, is highly anticipated to define the strategic landscape of the upcoming decade.