The NATO Summit in Ankara was seen as a test to determine if Allies can credibly deliver on last
year’s 5 per cent pledge. First, this policy paper analyzes the shift from the 5 per cent GDP target to
its implementation, observing new industrial initiatives like the “Front Door for Industry”
and “NATO Engine”, even if growing financial inputs continue to tell us little about actual defence
capabilities, and fiscal constraints continue to loom over key Allies. Second, it considers three
immediate crises – the Greenland sovereignty issue, the Iran conflict and the Strait of Hormuz
deadlock, and Ukraine – and contends each reveals the same structural problem: European
dependence on American power without meaningful input over its deployment. Finally, the paper
turns to Canada, where the transition from declaratory promises of defence spending to costly
implementation, the adoption of European frameworks such as SAFE, the Canadian-led Defence,
Security and Resilience Bank, and the increasing friction between the modernisation of NORAD and
the American “Golden Dome” missile-defence concept are discussed. While the Ankara
Summit advanced NATO’s implementation agenda, it failed to answer its fundamental
question: whether member states have a common understanding of consultation, sovereignty, risk,
and strategic purpose.
