Translated by Valeria D’Alessandro
The NATO 2024 Summit was held in Washington. This year’s summit took place amid several events, such as NATO seventy-fifth anniversary, and amidst shift in geopolitical dynamics, including Russian bombing of densely populated cities and an emerging alliance with Pyongyang. During the summit, Head of States from the 32 member nations of the Atlantic Alliance reviewed the internal situation concerning military investments. Along with guest representative, including Volodymyr Zelensky e Yoon Suk Yeol, they discussed various threats to security and international stability posed by third parties, primarily Russia.
Budget and Industrial Investments
The Summit also provided an opportunity for nations to update each other on their progress toward the Defence Investment Pledge made at last year’s Summit in Vilnius. One of the key objectives is for Member States to allocate 2% of their GDP to defense. So far, as confirmed at the Summit, 23 countries out of 32 invest at least 2% of their GDP in national security with Italy, Croatia and Portugal close to reaching this threshold. This is a significant improvement, as only 11 countries met the desired standard last year. The Russian threat has undoubtedly motivated this increase in NATO’s military spending, particularly in Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Finland, all of which have doubled the volume of their investments in recent years.
However, this latest measure is just one of many signs of the arms race in the transatlantic space, particularly in Europe. A collective effort was announced to improve and modernize arms production through the NATO Industrial Capacity Expansion Pledge. The initiative aims to standardize arms production across all the member States by implementing dedicated national plans. Supply chain coordination and international interoperability are also crucial, leading to an agreement between Leonardo and the German company Rheinmetall. Additionally, a contract was sealed with the American company Raytheon for the production of Stinger missiles, valued at $700 million. These short-range surface-to-air missiles have been supplied by NATO to Ukraine since the beginning of the war to counter Russia’s superior air power.
Ukraine: institutionalization of NATO support and future membership
Volodymyr Zelensky returned to Kyiv with firm backing from NATO, as the Alliance increasingly commits to supporting Ukraine and appears ready to open its doors to future membership. In response to an intensified Russian offensive in recent months, NATO has offered a proactive and robust support to the threatened country, announcing a supporting package worth €40 billion in financial aid and military supplies, including missiles and air defenses, to be delivered over the next 12 months. Additionally, the NATO Security Assistance and Training for Ukraine will be established, with its headquarter in Germany, dedicated to coordinating assistance and training Ukrainian military personnel. To further enhance support, the NATO-Ukraine Joint Analysis, Training and Education Centre has been founded in Poland. This center aims to improve interoperability by analyzing combat tactics and strategies.
The aids sent by NATO member States has paved the way for Ukraine to eventually join the Alliance as a member state. However, no clear criteria have been provided for Ukraine’s admission to NATO. Former Norwegian Prime Minster and Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, in his final Summit as Secretary General, reiterated NATO's commitment to long-term assistance for Kyiv. However, he also stated that Ukraine can only join the Alliance when the situation allows current member states to reach a consensus on the conditionality of its membership.
As a result, Ukraine received mixed outcomes from this meeting. On one hand, as frequently highlighted by Donald Trump, President Zelensky returned from the U.S. with substantial financial and military aid, providing his country with the means to counter Putin’s army for another year, despite growing reports of unregulated recruitment. Furthermore, NATO has moved beyond mere economic and material contributions, institutionalizing its involvement in the Russia-Ukraine war by establishing centers in Germani and Poland. On the other hand, despite the Alliance’s reaffirmed openness to welcoming Ukraine, the lack of clarity and admission criteria effectively contradicts the possibility of Ukraine joining before the end of the war. Some of the member states, such as Hungary, have been hesitant to grant Ukraine immediate membership, expressing skepticism about Ukraine’s future in the NATO beyond the current conflict. If Sweden’s accession raised tensions and controversies within the Alliance, it is expected that negotiations for Ukraine’s membership will lead to an even longer impasse.
Recent development and reactions in Far East
While the war in Ukraine was the most discussed topic, other important issues were also addressed. The participation of South Korea, Japan, Australia and New Zealand was no coincidence; these nations are crucial partners for security and stability in the Indo-Pacific region, whose importance is growing, particularly in light of Russian interests.
In recent months, tensions between the two Koreas have intensified, and Putin’s to visit Pyongyang only exacerbated the situation. Military cooperation has become fundamental for both North Korea and Russia, as they find common ground in their international isolation, particularly with the Russian army reaching a low point. In response to a revitalized Russia and a more assertive North Korea, South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol met with Secretary General Stoltenberg to grant NATO member States access to South Korean airspace and to share intelligence on North Korean weaponry used in Ukraine. Additionally, the potential for South Korea to send arms in support of Ukraine’s resistance has been widely discussed in recent weeks, although the specific terms and conditions have not yet been made public. North Korean's response was swift, denouncing the partnership between NATO and South Korea as an indirect “Asiatic NATO”.
Finally, People’s Republic of China did not escape criticism. In fact, the final communiqué of the Summit represents a significant rupture in NATO-China relations, denouncing Beijing’s role in facilitating Moscow’s actions. The Speaker of the Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs responded to these criticisms accusing NATO of crossing the line and warning of an impending confrontation.
Conclusive observation
In the end, 2024 NATO Summit demonstrated how the Alliance is adapting to recent geopolitics development. NATO took a step forward in financially and militarily supporting Ukraine, which welcomes this support but remains satisfied, as the long-awaited NATO membership is still subject to numerous variables. In Washington, the most destabilizing revisionist powers were condemned, and they responded to NATO’s expanding influence in the Far East with firm opposition, sparking concerns about potential tensions. However, NATO is prepared to manage any escalation, thanks to significant progress and promising investments in defense industries.