Ankara without Ukraine: why the July NATO summit is becoming a test for the alliance

The US is pushing for NATO allies not to invite Ukraine and partners from the Indo-Pacific region to formal meetings of the July summit in Ankara. This is reported by Politico citing sources in the alliance. This concerns not only Kyiv but also four official partners — Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and South Korea.

If confirmed, the decision will signal a reassessment of NATO’s role in the global security architecture.

Washington is returning NATO to the ‘Euro-Atlantic minimum’.

According to the publication, the White House seeks to view NATO solely as a Euro-Atlantic defense pact. This means abandoning the practice of recent decades — expanding the alliance’s functions beyond the traditional area of responsibility, including global partnerships, crisis management, and value-based initiatives.

The domestic political context in the US plays a significant role. The expansion of NATO’s mandate has long irritated a segment of the electorate focused on an isolationist agenda.

In fact, it is an attempt to narrow the format of the summit in Ankara to a ‘classic’ agenda of collective defense.

From ‘Putin’s ultimatum’ to a new reality for the alliance

Many have already forgotten that Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine was preceded by the so-called ‘Putin’s ultimatum’ — a set of demands to the US and NATO countries to revise the security architecture in Europe. Among the key points was the demand to withdraw forces and infrastructure from the territories of states that joined the alliance after 1997.

At the time, it was perceived as an unrealistic political demarche.

Today, amid internal discussions in the alliance and attempts to narrow its agenda, European capitals are increasingly questioning: where is the boundary of acceptable compromises?

The speed with which the alliance began to show signs of strategic fatigue and disagreements intensifies alarming assessments.

In this regard, analysts note: the discussion about inviting Ukraine and Asian partners is not a technical protocol issue. It is a marker of the direction NATO is moving — towards a global format or regional self-isolation.

That is why the editorial board of NAnews — Israel News | Nikk.Agency draws attention to the strategic context of what is happening: for Eastern European and Baltic countries, the summit format issue is directly related to the sense of security guarantees.

European response: investments in eastern borders

In parallel with the discussion around the summit in Ankara, the European Commission announced the launch of the EastInvest investment platform.

The new mechanism will start on February 26 and is aimed at supporting regions located on the eastern borders of the EU.

It involves multi-billion loans and access to financing for businesses and local authorities. The next EU budget provides additional resources for strengthening border defense and security.

Which countries will receive support

The program focuses on border areas of Finland, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.

According to the commission, these regions face a complex of problems: population outflow, slowing economic growth, and increasing inflationary pressure amid Russia’s war against Ukraine.

EastInvest is conceived as a stabilization tool and simultaneously as an element of the EU’s strategic autonomy.

Why this is important for Israel and the region

For Israel, what is happening in NATO is not an abstract topic. Changes in the alliance’s format affect the balance of power in Europe and, indirectly, global security configurations, including the Middle East.

If NATO ultimately returns to a narrow Euro-Atlantic format, it will strengthen the role of regional alliances and bilateral guarantees. In conditions where Russia continues its war against Ukraine and Iran deepens military-technical cooperation with Moscow, such shifts acquire additional significance.

The summit in Ankara will be an indicator. Not so much by the final declarations, but by the composition of the invitees and the signals received by allies and partners.

The question of inviting Ukraine is a question of the alliance’s strategic line. And the answer to it will determine not only symbolism but also the real security configuration in Europe for years to come.