Europe’s military future is starting to take shape

Behind all the projected confidence, determination and unity that came out of the NATO summit in Ankara last week, a different picture emerges. A picture spiderwebbed with widening cracks.

Unity on paper, divergence in practice

The NATO alliance was never designed as a bloc whose governments would agree on every international issue. Today’s disagreements, however, go well beyond tactical disputes and increasingly concern the fundamental strategic questions shaping global security.

The US-Israeli war on Iran has exposed these divisions particularly clearly. Despite Washington’s expectations, several of its major European allies – including France, Britain, Italy, and Spain – have shown little willingness to become directly involved. Their reluctance reflects not only concerns about escalation but also general political disagreements with Washington’s Middle East policy.

Should the confrontation with Iran expand, these differences are likely to become even more pronounced. Türkiye’s regional priorities differ significantly from those of Washington, while many European governments remain deeply skeptical of another major military engagement in the Middle East. Rather than strengthening transatlantic cohesion, the crisis risks widening existing political fault lines.

The same pattern appears elsewhere. NATO continues to describe China as a long-term strategic challenge, yet member states differ considerably on how confrontational their policies should become. Meanwhile, critically important regions such as the Indo-Pacific, Africa, and the Arctic received remarkably little attention in Ankara despite their growing geopolitical significance.