NATO Summit Opens in Ankara: Trump Renews Greenland Threat, Lifts Turkey Sanctions

TL;DR

• Greenland: Trump renewed his demand for US annexation, falsely claiming Chinese and Russian vessels were operating in Greenlandic waters, and threatened to withdraw US troops from Europe if Denmark refuses to negotiate.
• Turkey sanctions: The Trump administration lifted CAATSA sanctions and formally offered Turkey readmission to the F-35 programme, overriding Israeli and congressional objections.
• Arms blitz: A $40 billion NATO anti-drone coalition was announced, alongside Turkey's selection of the Saab GlobalEye for AWACS replacement, a Lockheed-Rheinmetall ATACMS joint venture, and a 155mm artillery standardisation pact.
• Fractures: The summit exposed deep divisions over military action against Iran, the push for 5% GDP defence spending, and Turkey's balancing act between NATO commitments and its relationships with Russia and China.
• Bottom line: The alliance is arming itself faster than at any point since the Cold War — but its political foundations have never been shakier.

Executive Summary

The NATO Summit opened in Ankara on 7 July 2026 against a backdrop of acute transatlantic strain, as President Donald Trump arrived in the Turkish capital and immediately reignited two of the alliance's most combustible disputes: his demand for US control of Greenland, and a dramatic reset of relations with host nation Turkey through the lifting of sanctions and a pathway back to the F-35 programme. The summit — the first held in Turkey and the first visit by a US president to the country in 11 years — saw NATO simultaneously attempt to demonstrate its relevance through tens of billions of dollars in new arms deals, even as the alliance's fundamental cohesion faced its most severe test since its founding.

1. The Greenland Bombshell

Within hours of landing in Ankara, Trump resurrected his push for the United States to acquire Greenland — a semi-autonomous territory of NATO ally Denmark — telling reporters that the island "should be controlled by the United States" and repeating the unsubstantiated claim that it is "surrounded by Chinese and Russian ships."¹

The remarks were not off-script improvisation. Trump went further, explicitly linking European pushback on Greenland to the continued presence of US forces on the continent. He suggested the United States could withdraw all of its armed services personnel from Europe in response to the continent's refusal to entertain his territorial ambitions.²

"Greenland is an important part of our national security. It should be controlled by the United States. And if Europe doesn't understand that, maybe they don't need our troops either." — President Trump, Ankara, 7 July 2026

The threat lands at a uniquely vulnerable moment. The Pentagon's 2026 National Defense Strategy, published in January, had already declared that Washington expects Europe to "take primary responsibility for its own conventional defence," and a six-month Pentagon review of US force posture in Europe has been examining the relocation of forward-stationed forces from Germany to Poland.³

European leaders had jointly described Trump's previous Greenland threats as "dangerous" ahead of the summit, but the explicit linkage to troop withdrawals represents a significant escalation. Denmark has consistently stated that Greenland is not for sale and that its future is a matter for the people of Greenland alone.

2. Turkey Sanctions Lifted: The F-35 Deal

In a parallel announcement that appeared carefully choreographed to reward the summit's host, Trump declared that the United States would lift sanctions on Turkey imposed in 2020 under the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA), and expressed willingness to sell F-35 Lightning II stealth fighter jets to Ankara.⁴

Background

Turkey was expelled from the F-35 programme and sanctioned in 2019-2020 after it took delivery of the Russian S-400 Triumf air defence system. US officials had long argued that operating both the S-400 and the F-35 would allow Russia to collect sensitive data on the stealth fighter's radar cross-section and electronic warfare capabilities — a concern that had enjoyed bipartisan consensus in Washington for years.

Trump's announcement marks a complete reversal of that position. When asked about the S-400 concerns, Trump told reporters he had "no concerns" about Turkey, describing it as "much more loyal" than other NATO members.⁵

The Netanyahu Intervention

The move comes despite an extraordinary public intervention by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who on Monday directly appealed to Trump not to proceed with the F-35 transfer, warning it would "upset the power balance" in the Middle East.⁶ Israel has long viewed Turkey under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan as a strategic competitor in the Eastern Mediterranean and has been alarmed by Ankara's deepening relationships with Hamas and other actors hostile to Israel.

Netanyahu's plea appears to have been ignored.

Legal Hurdles Remain

Despite Trump's declaration, significant legal and legislative obstacles remain before Turkey can be fully readmitted to the F-35 programme. CAATSA sanctions require congressional notification, and there remains bipartisan resistance on Capitol Hill — particularly from lawmakers concerned about Turkey's human rights record, its 2019 military offensive against Kurdish forces in northern Syria, and its ongoing tensions with NATO ally Greece over Aegean territorial claims.⁷

Nevertheless, the removal of CAATSA sanctions removes the primary legal barrier, and Trump's personal commitment to Erdogan — whom he has described as a close ally dating back to his first term — signals that the administration will push aggressively for full reinstatement.

3. The Arms Deal Blitz: NATO's "Show of Firepower"

Anticipating Trump's criticism, NATO leaders arrived in Ankara armed with a series of capability announcements designed to demonstrate that European allies are finally shouldering their share of the defence burden.

Key Announcements

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, speaking at the Summit Defence Industry Forum, framed the announcements as evidence that allies are "heeding the call" on burden-sharing. "These are not promises," Rutte said. "These are signed contracts, binding commitments, and production lines that are being built today."⁸

Rutte also demanded that allies present "clear, concrete and credible plans" to reach the 5% of GDP defence spending target agreed at the 2025 Hague Summit, with a 2035 deadline.¹¹

4. The Fractures Beneath the Surface

The Iran War Divide

The summit unfolds as the United States and Israel remain engaged in military operations against Iran — a conflict that has exposed deep divisions within the alliance. Several NATO members, including key European powers, declined to allow US forces to use their bases for strikes on Iran, prompting Trump to demand "loyalty" from allies ahead of the summit.¹¹

It remains unclear whether the Iran conflict will be formally addressed in the summit's communiqué. The Washington Post reported that the issue has been the subject of intense pre-summit diplomatic wrangling, with some allies resisting any language that could be interpreted as endorsing the US-Israeli campaign.¹²

The Spending Target Pressure

The 5% GDP target — a dramatic increase from the previous 2% guideline — remains a source of tension. While frontline states such as Poland and the Baltic nations have surged defence spending, several larger European economies remain well short of the target. Trump reinforced the message in a Truth Social video previewing his visit, urging Europe to spend more on its own defence and warning that the US "cannot and will not" continue to subsidise European security indefinitely.⁹

Turkey's Strategic Calculus

For host nation Turkey, the summit represents a carefully orchestrated moment of strategic vindication. Defence Minister Yaşar Güler told reporters that "with its strong military, advanced defence industry, effective diplomacy and strategic vision, Turkey will continue to be a key actor in NATO, Euro-Atlantic security and regional stability."¹³

Turkey commands NATO's second-largest army and sits at the intersection of the alliance's most pressing security challenges: the Black Sea and the Ukraine war to the north, the Middle East and Iran conflict to the south, and the Eastern Mediterranean. Erdogan has leveraged this geography masterfully, extracting concessions from both Washington and Brussels while maintaining a independent foreign policy that includes continued dialogue with Moscow.

The F-35 deal, if fully realised, would represent Erdogan's most significant strategic prize since the S-400 crisis began — restoring Turkey's access to fifth-generation air power while retaining the Russian air defence system that triggered the crisis in the first place.

5. Analysis: A Summit of Contradictions

The Ankara summit embodies the central paradox of the contemporary NATO alliance: unprecedented defence investment alongside unprecedented political fragmentation.

On paper, the numbers are impressive. The $40 billion anti-drone commitment, the AWACS replacement, the ATACMS joint venture, and the broader arms deals unveiled in Ankara represent the most significant capability investments in a generation. European allies are, belatedly but genuinely, rearming.

Yet the political foundations of the alliance have rarely been shakier. A US president who threatens to annex the territory of a fellow NATO member, who links troop withdrawals to territorial demands, and who has repeatedly questioned the value of Article 5 collective defence, is not a leader around whom allies can comfortably rally — no matter how many arms deals they sign.

The Greenland threat, in particular, cuts to the heart of the alliance's identity. NATO is built on the principle of sovereign equality among member states. A demand by its most powerful member to acquire the territory of another — backed by the implicit threat of security abandonment — is unprecedented in the alliance's 77-year history.

The Turkey sanctions reversal, meanwhile, illustrates Trump's preference for transactional bilateral relationships over institutional frameworks. Erdogan gets his F-35s; Trump gets a grateful host and a visible demonstration that he, not the "deep state" or Congress, determines US foreign policy. Whether the S-400 concerns that animated years of bipartisan opposition have genuinely been resolved, or simply set aside for political convenience, remains an open question.

6. What to Watch

1. Summit Communiqué Language: Whether the final statement addresses the Iran conflict, and in what terms, will signal the depth of the transatlantic rift.

2. Congressional Reaction to F-35 Deal: Bipartisan pushback on Capitol Hill could slow or block Turkey's full readmission to the programme, creating a rift between the executive and legislative branches.

3. Danish and European Response to Greenland: Denmark's response — and whether European allies rally behind Copenhagen — will test whether the Greenland threat produces genuine alliance solidarity or further fragmentation.

4. Force Posture Decisions: The Pentagon's basing review, expected to conclude in the coming months, will provide concrete shape to Trump's threat of troop withdrawals.

5. Russian and Chinese Reactions: Both Moscow and Beijing will be watching closely. A NATO in disarray serves their strategic interests; a NATO that rearms while fracturing politically presents a more complex picture.

Sources