World leaders, including Türkiye's President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan and Defense Minister Yaşar Güler gathered in Vilnius on June 2, 2025. But what truly gathered was something older than diplomacy: concern. In the shadow of Russia’s recent drone barrage against Ukrainian cities, leaders from NATO’s eastern flank and Nordic nations came together with one eye on Ukraine’s battlefield and the other on their own borders. Patriot air defense systems guarded the summit from above; from below, unresolved questions lingered.
Even though the war that broke out in Ukraine is still far from over, and peace hopes sometimes flicker, Ukraine’s path to NATO was again affirmed as irreversible during the summit. This wording, repeated since the 2023 Vilnius declaration, was again central to the summit’s final statement. The commitment is firm but not immediate. While leaders offered political and military support, the prospect of full NATO membership remains on hold until the war ends and unanimous approval is achieved. In the meantime, Ukraine is to be tied closer through defense cooperation and joint training.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s tone was urgent. He argued that hesitancy invites further aggression and warned that giving Moscow veto power over Ukraine’s alliances only emboldens it. His appeal resonated with front-line NATO states. Poland, Romania and the Baltic countries pushed for stronger wording and tougher sanctions. But Washington, under the Trump administration, maintains its cautious line. Trump has questioned NATO expansion before and repeated his stance that past commitments helped spark the war. The gap between eastern NATO allies and parts of the West, therefore, remains evident.
In a drone operation just before the summit, Kyiv targeted Russian airfields deep inside enemy territory. The Operation Spiderweb destroyed dozens of aircraft, including strategic bombers used to launch missile strikes on Ukrainian cities. Russia’s retaliation was swift. Massive drone and missile strikes hit Kyiv and other regions. Civilian and military casualties followed. Ukraine’s Defense Ministry acknowledged the cost, but added that the real damage had been inflicted on Russia’s strategic air fleet. Still, some Ukrainian citizens now ask: if this was only the initial response, what might follow?
Türkiye’s presence at the summit was more than symbolic. With President Erdoğan leading the delegation, Ankara reaffirmed its cautious but committed stance. Türkiye supports Ukraine’s sovereignty and provides significant defense assistance, including Bayraktar drones. At the same time, it maintains open diplomatic channels with Moscow. It is one of the few countries that can still speak to both sides. Erdoğan’s message, repeated in quieter circles, was consistent: diplomacy must remain a possibility. His offer to host a peace summit with Trump, Zelenskyy, and Putin in Türkiye may still sound ambitious. However, in an age of broken channels, even tentative openings matter.
Defense Minister Güler also delivered a message that embraced both unity and reform. He warned that export restrictions among allies undermine collective deterrence, urging their removal to enable smarter cooperation and greater capability alignment. He also emphasized Türkiye’s longstanding commitment to NATO’s Article 3 doctrine and its willingness to support a just cease-fire. Such statements resonated with leaders who aim to strengthen the alliance’s backbone while keeping political flexibility alive.
Few countries at the summit had the same leverage in both camps, and even fewer could take on the role of an honest broker without losing strategic relevance. That Ankara manages both is something that Europe and Washington should consider more seriously.
