NATO: After the Summit

Executive Summary

​

The 10 July expert discussion NATO After the Summit: Collective Defence, Deterrence, and Resilience in a Changing Security Environment run by the Strategic Security Initiative (SSI) examined the outcomes of the 2026 NATO Summit in Ankara. The discussion assessed the security implications of NATO’s growing Arctic presence, evolving hybrid threat deterrence strategy, and the role of contemporary Ukrainian support for the common European future. Rather than introducing a new strategic vision, representatives focused on translating security promises into practical military capability. Particular emphasis was placed on strengthening collective defence through increased defence spending, expanding industrial capacity, and improving public-private cooperation. The Summit demonstrated a growing expectation that European Allies assume greater responsibility for the Alliance's conventional deterrence and continue utilizing NATO networks as the primary framework for global security initiatives and transatlantic cooperation.

 

After Ankara

NATO's Strategic Transition

The 2026 Ankara Summit should be viewed as a milestone in NATO’s ongoing strategic adaptation and not as an  introduction for a fundamentally new agenda. The panel reinforced how NATO has shifted focus to prioritise the implementation of actionable progress  that will fulfill the Alliance’s promise of security through the acquisition of next generation defence systems, expanding defence industrial capacity, and enhancing operational readiness. 

With the NATO Alliance shifting away from political declarations toward practical delivery, defence spending is increasingly measured by its ability to generate deployable capabilities and long-term industrial resilience. With Dr. Giuseppe Spatafora recognising “the Alliance is moving from political declarations toward practical delivery, with defence spending increasingly measured by its ability to generate deployable capabilities and long-term industrial resilience.”

 

Resilience Beyond Conventional Defence: Enhancing Hybrid Threat Deterrence

​

Irina Mamulashvili, Head of International Security at SSI, highlighted resilience to hybrid threats as a fundamental component of NATO's broader security agenda. Despite receiving limited attention by world leaders at the Summit Declaration, hybrid activities have increased in their frequency and sophistication and become  strategically coordinated across EU and NATO territory and require a comprehensive approach extending beyond traditional military deterrence.

NATO's approach to countering hybrid threats has evolved considerably over the past decade. Since adopting its first strategy on countering hybrid warfare in 2015, the Alliance has increasingly integrated resilience into the core of collective defence. Through principles of deterrence, and defence against hybrid activities, NATO’s evolving  approach seeks not only to respond to incidents, but to (a) strengthen institutional preparedness, (b) enhance intelligence cooperation, and (c) reduce the vulnerabilities that hostile actors seek to exploit before crises emerge. 

The continued tailoring of the strategic approach reflects the evolving field of hybrid threat design and defence and has redefined the role of resilience in international security. As military confrontation becomes increasingly intertwined with the cyber environment, the strength of NATO's defence capabilities will depend more equally on military readiness critical hybrid infrastructure than conventional warfighting systems.

 

Supporting Ukraine: The New Foundation of Euro-Atlantic Security

Former United States Ambassador to Ukraine John Herbst voiced recognition for the importance of continued Western support for Ukraine, arguing continuing support remains indispensable not only for Ukraine's defence but also for the long-term credibility of Euro-Atlantic security.  Ambassador Herbst’s assessment of the Ankara Summit reinforces the understanding that assistance to Ukraine is an investment in European security, not simply support for a partner country.  

Ambassador Herbst further calls attention to the fact Ukraine has fundamentally transformed modern warfare through rapid technological innovation, arguing Ukraine's decentralised democratic political system enables engineers, private corporations, and military personnel to develop new technologies at a pace Europe has not previously seen. This continuous battlefield innovation, particularly in drone warfare and unmanned systems, has provided Ukraine with important operational advantages despite Russia's larger industrial base and military resources. Ambassador Herbst’s analysis cautions that Russia’s continued investments in heavy military technology reflect traditional NATO patterns with the continuous battlefield innovation and investment in lower-cost mass produced systems in Ukraine has preserved Ukraine's technological and strategic advantage and signaled a shift in modern military strategy and investment.

 

Expanded Arctic Presence: Nordic Accession as a Case Study for Ukraine

The increasing frequency and length of multinational military exercises in the high north and renewed defence procurement in Northern Europe indicates NATO’s Northern territorial holdings have evolved beyond passive deterrence, assuming a position of active defence. This transition, accelerated by the accession of Finland and Sweden, reflects NATO's continued interest in establishing a more dominant Arctic presence.

​

Dr. Neil Melvin, head of the Arctic and High North Programme at the Swedish Institute of International Affairs, uses the accession cases of Finland and Sweden whose membership fundamentally reshaped NATO's strategic geography, to explain the transformation of the high north into one of NATO's principal command centres. The extension of North Atlantic influence up to Russia’s easternmost Arctic border through the accession of Finland and the continued deployment of NATO's Forward Land Forces in Finland, creation of the Arctic Sentry initiative, and the establishment of new joint command centers under Joint Force Command Norfolk, as well as the increasing frequency and length of multinational military exercises in the high north and renewed defence procurement in Northern Europe, shows NATO is transforming its northern territory beyond passive deterrence to assume a position of active, anti-Russian defence.

 

Conclusion

The Ankara Summit reflected NATO's evolving response to an increasingly complex and contested security environment. SSI’s 10 July expert discussion highlighted European Allies assumption of greater responsibility for the Alliance-wide security while continuing to regard the transatlantic partnership as the indispensable foundation of collective defence. The discussion recognized NATO's security agenda as increasingly multidimensional, highlighting conversations on modernizing the 2015 Countering Hybrid Warfare strategy, and the processes for  procuring and producing next generation conventional weapons systems. In addition to re-emphasising the importance of an expanded high-north presence and tactics for improving Arctic operational readiness.

The Ankara Summit reaffirmed NATO's unity while illustrating the Alliance's gradual transition toward a more capable, resilient, and operationally integrated security infrastructure. As geopolitical competition intensifies, maintaining credible deterrence depends on economically strategic systems acquisition, a trajectory of technological innovation, expansion of regional industrial manufacturing capacity, and sustained political cooperation.

​

Prepared by Sydney SHEINFELD and Alexandre Buzaladze