The 36th NATO summit, which Ankara hosted this week for only the second time in the alliance’s history, was not an ordinary diplomatic meeting that included the leaders of the 32 countries and high-level representatives of the Gulf states. Rather, it turned into a deliberate show of force during which Turkey took advantage of a profound moment of Western confusion, to impose itself as an insurmountable axis in the European security equation, while Israel’s ability to influence within the alliance and in the Eastern Mediterranean declined.

According to an analytical article by Dr. Anat Hochberg-Marom in the Israeli newspaper “Maariv”, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan took advantage of a group of weaknesses experienced by NATO, starting with the growing concern about the possibility of a decline in the American role and Washington diverting its resources towards strategic competition with China, through the escalation of the Russian threat, all the way to European efforts to make the alliance more independent.

At a time when NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte is leading a more active approach to transforming NATO into a more European alliance, with the aim of reducing dependence on Washington, Erdogan has turned the summit into a platform to impose a new international agenda.

The discussions covered the most pressing issues, from the Russian-Ukrainian war and tension with Iran, to the ambitious goal of raising defense spending to 5% of GDP by 2035, a goal that will be strengthened with the rise in defense spending by Europe and Canada by about $90 billion during the year 2025.

The alliance leaders also discussed the basic challenges facing the Western defense structure, most notably NATO’s adaptation to cyberspace threats, energy security crises, and combat systems based on artificial intelligence, which are transformations that are reshaping the nature of the alliance and the extent of the threats it faces.

In light of the deepening disputes between NATO members, including the withdrawal of 5,000 American soldiers from Germany, the frictions between the Donald Trump administration and Rome and Madrid, the tension related to the issue of the annexation of Greenland, and the reservations of Paris and Berlin to intervene in the confrontation with Iran, Turkey is working to present itself not as an additional member of the alliance, but rather as an “indispensable central axis.”

Ankara is investing in a group of strategic assets, most notably its possession of the second largest army in NATO, with about 350,000 soldiers, in addition to a dominant defense industry, as Turkish drones constitute about 65% of the global market, in addition to a strategic geographic location overlooking the Black Sea, the Caucasus, and the Middle East.

Through these capabilities, Türkiye establishes itself as a necessary pillar of NATO stability and a balancing force within it, despite its continuing tensions with Greece and Cyprus, and at the same time continues to maneuver between Moscow and Tehran.

In parallel, Ankara is benefiting from the European arms race to consolidate its defense sector as an essential engine for growth, by reducing dependence on importing technology, integrating into the NATO value chain, and obtaining advanced technological knowledge in exchange for its field operational capabilities.

Investments in drone warfare and cyber capabilities, based on lessons learned from the war in Ukraine, have also strengthened Turkey’s weight within the alliance.

Turkey is expected to contribute about $355 million to NATO’s budget in 2026, and more than $730 million by 2030, after its defense exports to Europe and the United States increased four-fold, reaching $5.6 billion between 2021 and 2025.

Turkish concern about the establishment of a European security structure that leaves Ankara on the sidelines is not a passing matter, but rather represents a deep strategic concern for Erdogan.

The summit was held amid a long-term war of attrition in Ukraine, where Kiev is using drones and advanced offensive capabilities to disrupt Russian logistical supplies, threaten the Crimean Peninsula, and strike energy and industrial facilities hundreds of kilometers from the front, while Moscow still clings to its position.

In these circumstances, Turkey’s geostrategic importance becomes more prominent. Despite its economic relations with Moscow, including the civilian nuclear energy project that deepens its dependence on Russian energy, Ankara is aware of the weight of its membership in NATO, especially after the interception of Iranian missiles by the alliance’s joint air defense systems.

Erdogan used the summit to highlight the special challenges facing Turkey from the east and south, and to emphasize its fundamental contribution to European and transatlantic security, through its military strength and advanced defense industries, including a contract worth $1.9 billion to develop air defense systems in 2025, in addition to a sphere of influence extending across Europe, the Middle East, the Black Sea, the Caucasus, and Central Asia.

These data strengthen Ankara’s geopolitical position and support the defenses of NATO’s southern wing, while Norway strengthens the northern wing, and Poland supports the eastern wing.

Behind the public statements, Erdogan sent a clear strategic message to NATO leaders, stating that Turkey would not allow Europe to build a new defense architecture at its expense.

From Ankara’s perspective, any European initiative to create an independent defense mechanism that reduces dependence on the United States and reduces the importance of “frontline states” is a direct threat to Türkiye’s geopolitical position.

Improving relations with Washington, with which bilateral trade volume reached $49.1 billion in 2025, strengthens Türkiye’s position as a key pivot in transatlantic security.

This improvement includes removing restrictions imposed on the sale of F-35 fighters, and deepening American investments in the fields of energy and infrastructure, but at the same time it creates a strategic dilemma for NATO.

The move to the “NATO 3.0” model, in which Europe bears responsibility for conventional defense, while the United States focuses on nuclear deterrence and strategic capabilities, is changing the balance of power within the alliance.

At a time when Washington is focusing its resources on competing with Beijing, Türkiye is positioning itself as a main pillar and a stable and flexible element in the face of multiple crises and threats coming from Asia, the Caucasus, and the Middle East.

The Ankara summit demonstrated a shift in the Western view of Turkey, as it was now considered, after years of tension, an irreplaceable element, due to its geographical location, its ability to maneuver diplomatically, and its simultaneous network of relations with competing centers of power.

In this context, Europe and the United States are adopting a more pragmatic approach towards Erdogan, which is based on prioritizing common security interests, most notably restraining Russia, over political differences.

The holding of the NATO summit in Ankara and the increasing strength of the Turkish defense industries place Israel facing a multi-dimensional strategic challenge, reflecting a continuing erosion in its area of ​​influence within the alliance and in the eastern Mediterranean.

The rise of Turkey as the host country for the summit and the influential country in shaping the alliance’s agenda pushes Israel to the margins, and makes it difficult for it to employ its security and intelligence relations, especially in light of Erdogan’s presentation of it as a factor destabilizing regional stability.

The cessation of cooperation between Türkiye and Israel since October 7 is now gaining broader legitimacy and strengthening the anti-Israel discourse against the backdrop of the war in Gaza.

At the same time, Türkiye is working to establish itself as a logistical and trade node between Asia and Europe, through the “Middle Corridor” and other energy and infrastructure initiatives.

At the forefront of these moves are the strategic agreements with Saudi Arabia to revive the Hejaz Railway and develop a land trade corridor linking Europe to the Middle East and the Gulf, making it a competitor to the “India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor” project, known for short as “IMEC”, which aims to transport goods between India and Europe via the Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Israel and Greece.

These steps increase Türkiye’s influence over trade routes and market access, and also undermine Israel’s strategic advantage in the eastern Mediterranean.

Although there is no immediate threat to Israeli gas exports, there are fears that Türkiye will become a necessary energy hub in the future, strengthening its regional position and limiting Israel’s maritime projects and strategic ties.

In light of this reality, Israel is required to make a radical change in its approach and build a proactive and pragmatic strategy, by deepening bilateral relations with friendly European countries, enhancing cooperation with Greece, Cyprus, Egypt, the UAE, and the United States, and developing alternative paths for trade and energy that bypass Türkiye.

Although NATO countries still see Israel as an essential technological and security partner, the general picture reveals that Ankara is working in a systematic and sophisticated manner to reduce Israeli influence regionally, and to move competition from the political sphere to a broader geo-economic sphere.

In conclusion, the Ankara summit represented a turning point in line with Erdogan’s hegemonic ambitions, as Türkiye was no longer a secondary player, but rather a central force contributing to shaping the future of European and Middle Eastern security.

As for Israel, the new geopolitical and security equation requires recalculating the path, accelerating the building of regional alliances and creating alternative infrastructure and corridors, to ensure its strategic independence during the next decade.