Nato summit in Ankara: major reshuffle ahead?

Helsingin Sanomat is concerned about unity within a European Nato:

“Although there is greater willingness across Europe to increase defence spending, Nato cannot be Europeanised without conflict. Trump's erratic alliance policy, Erdoğan's authoritarian government and the differing levels of support among Nato countries for Ukraine are just a few examples of how difficult it is even for Europe to establish a common security policy. The persistent threat from Russia means that Nato's eastern flank is a cause for concern. For Finland, it is not only the US that poses a problem, it is also the question of whether all European states will share political and military responsibility for collective defence.”

The old Nato is long dead, comments the Süddeutsche Zeitung:

“And everyone knows it. The withdrawal of the United States has begun and is, at least in part, irreversible. ... It is no longer a question of distributing the burden more evenly. Mutual assistance will have to be guaranteed to a large extent by the Europeans. The role of the US will increasingly be limited to that of a reinsurer, albeit an indispensable one, particularly in the nuclear sphere. Whether this model will function at all depends, apart from the US, essentially on one member state: Germany. This follows from a process of elimination. If we look at size, economic clout and geographical location, only Germany remains as the potential centre of the new Nato.”

The Turkish president can make the most of this opportunity to play the strongman, both domestically and internationally, comments SRF correspondent Sebastian Ramspeck:

“Erdoğan is using the summit to flex his muscles. Turkey has a rapidly growing arms industry, it has Nato's second largest army and controls access between the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. It was also one of the few countries that was able to mediate between Russia and Ukraine. On the domestic front, this show of power is taking the form of repressions: shortly before the summit critics of Erdoğan were arrested, demonstrations were banned and oppositional media was denied access to the event.”

Phileleftheros warns:

“Turkey remains interested in its European prospects, even though it knows it will not become a full member. ... But even to take any steps in this direction it must change its behaviour and work towards resolving the Cyprus issue. ... So it came as a surprise when the EU's High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Kaja Kallas, described Turkey last week in Ankara as 'a key partner on security, migration, and energy, as well as an EU candidate country'. Such statements are really not helpful. On the contrary, they encourage Ankara to not back down. Is that really what they want?”

The Czech Republic will have to face accusations in Ankara that it is neglecting its Nato duties, fears Reflex:

“The main focus of this summit is how Europe can strengthen its security. And this is directly linked to how much the member states spend on defence. The Czech Republic and the government of Andrej Babiš have failed to provide a satisfactory answer to this question. For the simple reason that we spend too little on defence and our contribution to European security is therefore inadequate. ... If there's one area at this summit where Andrej Babiš will pull out all the stops, it will be in his efforts to secure photos or videos of himself with Donald Trump and Emmanuel Macron. ... But that is woefully insufficient. And it certainly won't strengthen the Czech Republic's defence and security.”

The time has come for a mature discussion on mutual relationships, says De Morgen:

“It is in the interests of both the European Nato members and the US to establish at this summit exactly what Nato 3.0 should look like and who does what when it comes to the crunch. Let's stop giving the impression that there is still a unified, close alliance; instead, let us strive for an optimal long-distance relationship, with a clear timetable for a divorce settlement where necessary, and joint efforts in those areas where this is still possible.”

El Periódico de Catalunya comments on how Europe's role in Nato has changed:

“The European Nato member states have increased their defence spending. By 2025, military spending by European countries had risen by 20 percent – far more than in China and three times as much as in Russia, despite the war in Ukraine. ... The European position has prevailed on two key issues: Ukraine and Iran. The Ankara summit must therefore result in an alliance with more European input, with a more multipolar character and with greater respect for the rules. Those who pay more can demand more.”

EU correspondent Valérie de Graffenried calls in Le Temps for Europe to be more assertive:

“Is giving up all ambition in order to preserve a facade of unity really a viable strategy? Europe can certainly no longer hide its vulnerability in the face of Donald Trump's unpredictability, which regularly undermines transatlantic relations. And all too often, it gives the impression of merely passively accepting developments. Yet the real challenge for Nato is no longer to simply cope with Donald Trump but to demonstrate that its cohesion, credibility and deterrent capability do not depend on the whims of a single US president.”

Italy's Prime Minister won't have an easy time at the the summit, Corriere della Sera explains:

“Giorgia Meloni faces a twofold and difficult challenge at the Nato summit. ... Like all European leaders, first and foremost she will have to deal with Donald Trump. Diplomats – particularly the Americans – are expecting the President's next solo appearance to be eccentric and reckless. He is likely to lash out at those allies who he says failed to support him in the conflict with Iran, while at the same time criticising those governments which in his view are still spending too little on defence. The government led by Meloni falls into both categories and is therefore – along with the Spanish government under Pedro Sánchez – particularly exposed to Trump's wrath.”

One of Kyiv's key expectations for the Nato summit is that the decision will be taken to strengthen its defence capabilities against ballistic threats, 24tv.ua writes:

“It's no longer enough just to discuss new aid packages every few months – long-term solutions are needed. Joint arms production, licences to manufacture modern air defence systems, stepping up the production of Patriot missiles and new mechanisms for funding the defence industry – all this can help Ukraine not only to hold its ground in the war against the Russian aggressor, but also to inflict significant defeats on it and defend its own cities. The latest massive attack on the capital has shown that we have problems countering Russian ballistic missiles, proving that we cannot manage without support on that front.”