NATO leaders look for unity as Trump attends annual summit
As NATO leaders gather for this week's summit in Turkey, Europe is preparing to shoulder more of its own defense. David M. Cattler of the Center for European Policy Analysis explains why.
DON GONYEA, HOST:
World leaders congratulated President Trump on the U.S.'s 250th birthday over the weekend. Among them were Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump and Putin reportedly talked for some 90 minutes. A senior Kremlin aide said Trump offered to work toward a rapid end to the fighting. This week, President Trump is headed to Ankara, Turkey, for this year's NATO summit where Russia will loom large. Heading into the meeting, there's widespread anxiety about the U.S.'s changing role in the alliance. Trump has been critical of the U.S. relationship with NATO, saying it hasn't been reciprocal.
David M. Cattler is a senior fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis and previously served as NATO's assistant secretary general for intelligence and security. I asked him about the changing dynamics within the alliance and about President Trump's criticism toward NATO.
DAVID M CATTLER: Well, I think it's important to take a look at the contributions that all the allies make. Certainly, the United States makes the largest contributions in terms of not just our U.S. defense spending, but also the forces that we've chosen to allocate, the capabilities that we've chosen to bring to bear. But that doesn't mean that the other allies aren't also making contributions. Many of them have also made contributions that are quite significant when you look at what their GDPs are and the capabilities that they're bringing to various NATO exercises for deterrence and defense.
GONYEA: Military spending has been a significant sticking point for President Trump in past NATO meetings. This year, it's been reported that all European allies met spending targets of at least 2% of GDP, though there are still more deadlines in years to come. How much of a role did the Trump administration play in pushing - really pushing hard toward that result?
CATTLER: The Trump administration in the president's first term and now in his second term has actually played a pretty significant role in attracting other nations' attention to the spending level and getting that agreement, not just to reach the 2% from the Wales commitment from some years ago, but also to the 5% commitment that came out of The Hague summit. But what's most important now, moving forward, that the spending is rising is actually translating the spending into real military capability. I think that's one of the things that this summit is going to focus on.
GONYEA: I want to ask about boots on the ground. Washington has threatened to reduce the number of U.S. troops stationed in Europe. Why does that decision matter?
CATTLER: I think the Europeans have reacted in the way that they have to some of these forced movements that seem a little bit unannounced or just less discussed in diplomatic or in military channels because it's really a twofold problem. It's the military capability, which could be surged. I mean, just because you're not there full time doesn't mean you can't get there rapidly. But I think even more so now, with Russia's illegal war against Ukraine still going now more than four years on, the potential for other crises to be caused by the Russians around Europe, they're looking at the placement and the numbers of American troops and, in fact, some European troops that are deployed for various NATO purposes as signals of the alliances' resolve.
GONYEA: You have said that, as the U.S. commitment to European defense wanes, NATO needs sufficient time to adapt to that new reality. What kind of timeline are we talking about?
CATTLER: Well, I think, Don, it depends on the scenario and the capability sets that would need to be brought to bear. What's really important right now is that European governments have reached a really important conclusion, and that's that regardless of who occupies the White House, Europe needs to be capable of carrying more of the conventional defense burden. Interestingly, recent polling suggests that European public's increasingly share that view. Europeans really want a stronger European pillar within NATO, not to replace the United States but to make the alliance more resilient.
Now, there's another factor, though, that's on a lot of Europeans minds, and that's how long would it take for Russia, after a war in Ukraine or even during a war, to have military capability to threaten them. And I think in broad terms, what you tend to hear is the closer you are to Russia, the shorter you believe that timeline to be. Some nations might tell you 12 months to 18 months. But all allies agree that Russia is an adversary to the alliance and that their appetite is not necessarily satisfied with the military conflict in Ukraine alone.
GONYEA: The Polish prime minister, Donald Tusk, says he's preparing for a potential Russian lightning offensive into his country, a NATO country. That's the kind of thing you were just talking about. The closer you are to Russia, the more worried you are. How realistic are those concerns?
CATTLER: Well, I think those concerns are quite realistic. I think if you look just in the last few days, there's been reporting in the media about Poland being warned by the United States that that potential is there, in fact, for Russia to either directly attack Poland or to cause some incident that might involve military force. The stance that Warsaw has taken is that they need to be able to defend themselves against the range of military scenarios that they imagine threaten them, whether or not NATO or any other ally is there for them. And correspondingly, they're making the political decisions necessary to find the resources to get that done for themselves.
GONYEA: How will you define the success of this summit this coming week in Ankara?
CATTLER: The summit won't ultimately judge by the length of its communique or even by the size of the spending pledge that comes out of it. I think history is more likely to judge this summit on whether NATO actually prove capable of converting political consensus, all that increased investment and the growing public support into some real military capability quickly enough to preserve credible deterrence. And I think, when you look back over the last four or five summits, the alliance has largely chosen its strategic direction, so now is the time for the alliance to decide to deliver.
GONYEA: David M. Cattler is a senior fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis. He previously served as NATO's assistant secretary general for intelligence and security. Thank you.
CATTLER: Thanks, Don. I really appreciate the time.
Copyright © 2026 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.
Accuracy and availability of NPR transcripts may vary. Transcript text may be revised to correct errors or match updates to audio. Audio on npr.org may be edited after its original broadcast or publication. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
Read the full story at NPR ↗
As NATO leaders gather for this week's summit in Turkey, Europe is preparing to shoulder more of its own defense. David M. Cattler of the Center for European Policy Analysis…
This lens runs the verified story through Cinnamon's AI — wired in the next step.
As NATO leaders gather for this week's summit in Turkey, Europe is preparing to shoulder more of its own defense. David M. Cattler of the Center for European Policy Analysis explains why.
DON GONYEA, HOST:
World leaders congratulated President Trump on the U.S.'s 250th birthday over the weekend. Among them were Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump and Putin reportedly talked for some 90 minutes. A senior Kremlin aide said Trump offered to work toward a rapid end to the fighting. This week, President Trump is headed to Ankara, Turkey, for this year's NATO summit where Russia will loom large. Heading into the meeting, there's widespread anxiety about the U.S.'s changing role in the alliance. Trump has been critical of the U.S. relationship with NATO, saying it hasn't been reciprocal.
David M. Cattler is a senior fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis and previously served as NATO's assistant secretary general for intelligence and security. I asked him about the changing dynamics within the alliance and about President Trump's criticism toward NATO.
DAVID M CATTLER: Well, I think it's important to take a look at the contributions that all the allies make. Certainly, the United States makes the largest contributions in terms of not just our U.S. defense spending, but also the forces that we've chosen to allocate, the capabilities that we've chosen to bring to bear. But that doesn't mean that the other allies aren't also making contributions. Many of them have also made contributions that are quite significant when you look at what their GDPs are and the capabilities that they're bringing to various NATO exercises for deterrence and defense.
GONYEA: Military spending has been a significant sticking point for President Trump in past NATO meetings. This year, it's been reported that all European allies met spending targets of at least 2% of GDP, though there are still more deadlines in years to come. How much of a role did the Trump administration play in pushing - really pushing hard toward that result?
CATTLER: The Trump administration in the president's first term and now in his second term has actually played a pretty significant role in attracting other nations' attention to the spending level and getting that agreement, not just to reach the 2% from the Wales commitment from some years ago, but also to the 5% commitment that came out of The Hague summit. But what's most important now, moving forward, that the spending is rising is actually translating the spending into real military capability. I think that's one of the things that this summit is going to focus on.
GONYEA: I want to ask about boots on the ground. Washington has threatened to reduce the number of U.S. troops stationed in Europe. Why does that decision matter?
CATTLER: I think the Europeans have reacted in the way that they have to some of these forced movements that seem a little bit unannounced or just less discussed in diplomatic or in military channels because it's really a twofold problem. It's the military capability, which could be surged. I mean, just because you're not there full time doesn't mean you can't get there rapidly. But I think even more so now, with Russia's illegal war against Ukraine still going now more than four years on, the potential for other crises to be caused by the Russians around Europe, they're looking at the placement and the numbers of American troops and, in fact, some European troops that are deployed for various NATO purposes as signals of the alliances' resolve.
GONYEA: You have said that, as the U.S. commitment to European defense wanes, NATO needs sufficient time to adapt to that new reality. What kind of timeline are we talking about?
CATTLER: Well, I think, Don, it depends on the scenario and the capability sets that would need to be brought to bear. What's really important right now is that European governments have reached a really important conclusion, and that's that regardless of who occupies the White House, Europe needs to be capable of carrying more of the conventional defense burden. Interestingly, recent polling suggests that European public's increasingly share that view. Europeans really want a stronger European pillar within NATO, not to replace the United States but to make the alliance more resilient.
Now, there's another factor, though, that's on a lot of Europeans minds, and that's how long would it take for Russia, after a war in Ukraine or even during a war, to have military capability to threaten them. And I think in broad terms, what you tend to hear is the closer you are to Russia, the shorter you believe that timeline to be. Some nations might tell you 12 months to 18 months. But all allies agree that Russia is an adversary to the alliance and that their appetite is not necessarily satisfied with the military conflict in Ukraine alone.
GONYEA: The Polish prime minister, Donald Tusk, says he's preparing for a potential Russian lightning offensive into his country, a NATO country. That's the kind of thing you were just talking about. The closer you are to Russia, the more worried you are. How realistic are those concerns?
CATTLER: Well, I think those concerns are quite realistic. I think if you look just in the last few days, there's been reporting in the media about Poland being warned by the United States that that potential is there, in fact, for Russia to either directly attack Poland or to cause some incident that might involve military force. The stance that Warsaw has taken is that they need to be able to defend themselves against the range of military scenarios that they imagine threaten them, whether or not NATO or any other ally is there for them. And correspondingly, they're making the political decisions necessary to find the resources to get that done for themselves.
GONYEA: How will you define the success of this summit this coming week in Ankara?
CATTLER: The summit won't ultimately judge by the length of its communique or even by the size of the spending pledge that comes out of it. I think history is more likely to judge this summit on whether NATO actually prove capable of converting political consensus, all that increased investment and the growing public support into some real military capability quickly enough to preserve credible deterrence. And I think, when you look back over the last four or five summits, the alliance has largely chosen its strategic direction, so now is the time for the alliance to decide to deliver.
GONYEA: David M. Cattler is a senior fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis. He previously served as NATO's assistant secretary general for intelligence and security. Thank you.
CATTLER: Thanks, Don. I really appreciate the time.
Copyright © 2026 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.
Accuracy and availability of NPR transcripts may vary. Transcript text may be revised to correct errors or match updates to audio. Audio on npr.org may be edited after its original broadcast or publication. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
Read the full story at NPR ↗
As NATO leaders gather for this week's summit in Turkey, Europe is preparing to shoulder more of its own defense. David M. Cattler of the Center for European Policy Analysis explains why.
DON GONYEA, HOST:
World leaders congratulated President Trump on the U.S.'s 250th birthday over the weekend. Among them were Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump and Putin reportedly talked for some 90 minutes. A senior Kremlin aide said Trump offered to work toward a rapid end to the fighting. This week, President Trump is headed to Ankara, Turkey, for this year's NATO summit where Russia will loom large. Heading into the meeting, there's widespread anxiety about the U.S.'s changing role in the alliance. Trump has been critical of the U.S. relationship with NATO, saying it hasn't been reciprocal.
David M. Cattler is a senior fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis and previously served as NATO's assistant secretary general for intelligence and security. I asked him about the changing dynamics within the alliance and about President Trump's criticism toward NATO.
DAVID M CATTLER: Well, I think it's important to take a look at the contributions that all the allies make. Certainly, the United States makes the largest contributions in terms of not just our U.S. defense spending, but also the forces that we've chosen to allocate, the capabilities that we've chosen to bring to bear. But that doesn't mean that the other allies aren't also making contributions. Many of them have also made contributions that are quite significant when you look at what their GDPs are and the capabilities that they're bringing to various NATO exercises for deterrence and defense.
GONYEA: Military spending has been a significant sticking point for President Trump in past NATO meetings. This year, it's been reported that all European allies met spending targets of at least 2% of GDP, though there are still more deadlines in years to come. How much of a role did the Trump administration play in pushing - really pushing hard toward that result?
CATTLER: The Trump administration in the president's first term and now in his second term has actually played a pretty significant role in attracting other nations' attention to the spending level and getting that agreement, not just to reach the 2% from the Wales commitment from some years ago, but also to the 5% commitment that came out of The Hague summit. But what's most important now, moving forward, that the spending is rising is actually translating the spending into real military capability. I think that's one of the things that this summit is going to focus on.
GONYEA: I want to ask about boots on the ground. Washington has threatened to reduce the number of U.S. troops stationed in Europe. Why does that decision matter?
CATTLER: I think the Europeans have reacted in the way that they have to some of these forced movements that seem a little bit unannounced or just less discussed in diplomatic or in military channels because it's really a twofold problem. It's the military capability, which could be surged. I mean, just because you're not there full time doesn't mean you can't get there rapidly. But I think even more so now, with Russia's illegal war against Ukraine still going now more than four years on, the potential for other crises to be caused by the Russians around Europe, they're looking at the placement and the numbers of American troops and, in fact, some European troops that are deployed for various NATO purposes as signals of the alliances' resolve.
GONYEA: You have said that, as the U.S. commitment to European defense wanes, NATO needs sufficient time to adapt to that new reality. What kind of timeline are we talking about?
CATTLER: Well, I think, Don, it depends on the scenario and the capability sets that would need to be brought to bear. What's really important right now is that European governments have reached a really important conclusion, and that's that regardless of who occupies the White House, Europe needs to be capable of carrying more of the conventional defense burden. Interestingly, recent polling suggests that European public's increasingly share that view. Europeans really want a stronger European pillar within NATO, not to replace the United States but to make the alliance more resilient.
Now, there's another factor, though, that's on a lot of Europeans minds, and that's how long would it take for Russia, after a war in Ukraine or even during a war, to have military capability to threaten them. And I think in broad terms, what you tend to hear is the closer you are to Russia, the shorter you believe that timeline to be. Some nations might tell you 12 months to 18 months. But all allies agree that Russia is an adversary to the alliance and that their appetite is not necessarily satisfied with the military conflict in Ukraine alone.
GONYEA: The Polish prime minister, Donald Tusk, says he's preparing for a potential Russian lightning offensive into his country, a NATO country. That's the kind of thing you were just talking about. The closer you are to Russia, the more worried you are. How realistic are those concerns?
CATTLER: Well, I think those concerns are quite realistic. I think if you look just in the last few days, there's been reporting in the media about Poland being warned by the United States that that potential is there, in fact, for Russia to either directly attack Poland or to cause some incident that might involve military force. The stance that Warsaw has taken is that they need to be able to defend themselves against the range of military scenarios that they imagine threaten them, whether or not NATO or any other ally is there for them. And correspondingly, they're making the political decisions necessary to find the resources to get that done for themselves.
GONYEA: How will you define the success of this summit this coming week in Ankara?
CATTLER: The summit won't ultimately judge by the length of its communique or even by the size of the spending pledge that comes out of it. I think history is more likely to judge this summit on whether NATO actually prove capable of converting political consensus, all that increased investment and the growing public support into some real military capability quickly enough to preserve credible deterrence. And I think, when you look back over the last four or five summits, the alliance has largely chosen its strategic direction, so now is the time for the alliance to decide to deliver.
GONYEA: David M. Cattler is a senior fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis. He previously served as NATO's assistant secretary general for intelligence and security. Thank you.
CATTLER: Thanks, Don. I really appreciate the time.
Copyright © 2026 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.
Accuracy and availability of NPR transcripts may vary. Transcript text may be revised to correct errors or match updates to audio. Audio on npr.org may be edited after its original broadcast or publication. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
Read the full story at NPR ↗
This lens runs the verified story through Cinnamon's AI — wired in the next step.
- As NATO leaders gather for this week's summit in Turkey, Europe is preparing to shoulder more of its own defense.
- Cattler of the Center for European Policy Analysis…
How we verified this · single source · not yet corroborated
The thread
- COP30: Trump and many leaders are skipping it, so does the summit still have a point?
- Turkey intensifies crackdown on public life in run-up to Nato summit in Ankara
- As the Trump administration targets funding, scientists look beyond the U.S. to work
- Zelenskyy calls for ‘strong decisions’ at Nato summit as Russia kills 21 in overnight strikes on Kyiv – Europe live
- Trump won spending promises from NATO last year. This week, he'll try to enforce them