NATO becomes more assertive and spins straw into gold
Despite many details having been worked out beforehand, developments condensed at the summit within a short time. Due to the accession of Finland and Sweden, NATO held a three-day meeting, larger than ever. The world's largest defense alliance now unites roughly half of global economic power. The dominant theme was Russia's attack war in Ukraine and the threat to Europe. Five insights from the jubilee meeting in Washington, where NATO was founded 75 years ago.
NATO fortifies Fort Europe
In recent years, NATO has adapted to the new geopolitical reality, driven further by Russia's aggression. The commander of the US armed forces referred to the changes in the alliance as a "massive shift." In case of emergency, NATO can mobilize half a million soldiers for the defense of Europe within 30 to 100 days, along with air power, navy, and more. Detailed deployment plans exist for various regions and scenarios, with NATO and its members conducting corresponding maneuvers. Deterrence is the top priority, and it's hoped that it won't even come to a defense situation. Starting in 2026, US intermediate-range missiles will be stationed in Germany again.
Ukraine received the greatest informal commitment to membership from the alliance. The path is described as "irreversible" in the final declaration. More might not be possible practically: A condition-free entry by Kiev in the midst of the war could mean an NATO intervention and direct confrontation with Russia, which the alliance wants to avoid. US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin also emphasized this during the summit. For war-torn Ukraine, the promise is initially meaningless: nothing at all.
The label had already circulated among the alliance members before the summit and apparently appealed to many: pleasant-sounding in tone, significant in terms of concrete steps, but hollow. Sarcasm aside: It's nice when one doesn't want to make a decision but wants it to sound like one has. Unlike the previous year in Vilnius, Volodymyr Zelensky did not put the table and complain about the lack of an invitation to the accession process into the alliance. The Ukrainian president has grown accustomed to the rules. But wouldn't it have been better for NATO if he hadn't done it? Instead of a direct membership, the EU, Germany, and more than 20 other countries have signed bilateral military support agreements with Ukraine, which NATO calls the "Ukraine Compact."
Press office turns straw into gold
Admittedly, this decision was news: For the first time since the end of the Cold War, the US wants to station intermediate-range missiles in Germany that can target Russia. But if it's about Ukraine's interests, the NATO alliance's PR machine also turns this into news, which is actually a zero. The "irreversible path" is one thing, the additional valuable air defense system Patriot, which US President Joe Biden announced at the 75th anniversary celebration, is the other. This is an old hat, known for months and already planned in the Ukrainian contingency plan.
Five strategic air defense systems have come together, praising Western aid from Biden, with three of them already in use in Ukraine for a long time. And it is clearly not enough, as the murderously successful attack on a children's hospital at the beginning of the week demonstrated. Such a heinous attack earned condemnation even in the closing statement. However, more Patriot systems from the NATO alliance are not available to protect the country from Putin's brutal air attacks.
No One Dares to Invoke the Two-Percent Clause
There should be more joint procurement of military material from NATO partners. The alliance confirms that the greatest and immediate security threat comes from Russia. In previous years, the Kremlin was seen in this light, but in other years, it had not reoriented its Russian economy towards war and had invested at least 7 percent of its economic output into its own military power, according to western analyses. The NATO demands annual defense spending of 2 percent of the Gross Domestic Product from its members.
The NATO members in Europe have come together on this percentage for the first time this year, but nine of the 32 member states remain below it. Should the alliance perhaps also take on a few more steps to get closer to what the adversary is doing? Many experts and analysts have no doubts about the necessity of this. However, the Two-Percent Clause did not make it onto the summit agenda, and it is questionable whether this could be changed into a Three-Percent Clause soon. Or should it? The topic of costs and cost sharing in the NATO is too sensitive and controversial. No one wants to stir up the Two-Percent Pot in Washington.
The Alliance Toughens Its Tone Against China
A new geopolitical alignment was spoken of by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, referring to the cooperation between Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea in military matters. He was not alone in this view. According to the USA, Moscow's war in Ukraine would not have been possible without Beijing's support. Practically everything the Russian military industry needs to produce its weapons comes from there. Blinken proposes sanctions, and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg confirmed that China's support is not much different from direct weapons deliveries to Russia.
The 32 member states designate the country as a "decisive helper" in the Ukraine war in their final statement. A notable step, since China is an enormously important trading partner for both the USA and Europe. Beijing reacted angrily.
Trump is Omnipresent
US President Joe Biden was the host, but Donald Trump, who will be endorsed by the Republicans as a candidate for the November election next week, was present everywhere. In the decisions, the question lurks between the lines: what would happen if Trump returned to the White House? The great NATO skeptic could block US aid to Ukraine or demand much more from the allies. After all, the United States is by far the most important member of the military alliance.
Washington is already giving more control out of its hands, so that the NATO becomes "trumpfester": Instead of the USA, the alliance will "very soon" take over the training and coordination of Ukraine aid in a new command center in Wiesbaden. In addition, there is a pledge for weapons deliveries worth 40 billion US dollars in the coming year. With the help of the "Ukraine Compact" agreements, Ukraine and its military should be supported "up to the 2030s." Possible returns from the White House do not have to mean an inevitable and immediate cost to European security.
- During the discussion about Ukraine's future membership in NATO, US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin stated that direct intervention by the alliance and a confrontation with Russia should be avoided.
- Despite President Volodymyr Zelensky not receiving an invitation to the accession process into NATO, numerous bilateral military support agreements have been signed between Ukraine, the EU, and over 20 other countries.
- At the NATO summit, US President Joe Biden announced plans to deploy intermediate-range missiles in Germany, which can target Russia, but analysts argue that this is not new information as it was already planned in Ukraine's contingency plan.
- Russia's aggression in Ukraine and the threat it poses to Europe was a dominant theme at the NATO summit in Washington, where the alliance reiterated its demand for its members to spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense annually.
- The US Secretary of State Antony Blinken criticized China's support for Russia's military industry, stating that Beijing's actions were similar to direct weapons deliveries to Russia, which the NATO alliance deemed a decisive help in Russia's war in Ukraine.
