‘This has to happen in the next 5–10 years’ With a growing Russian threat and Trump raising the stakes, NATO scrambles to lock in new defense plans
NATO defense ministers convened in Brussels this week for their final meeting ahead of the alliance’s next summit, set to take place in The Hague on June 24–25, where leaders are expected to endorse a new set of capability targets aimed at strengthening deterrence and defense against Russia. The talks came amid strategic uncertainty, as Russia’s war in Ukraine grinds on and European NATO members continue to grapple with the Trump administration’s transactional posture and blunt communication style. Meduza reports on what officials and politicians had to say about the proposed capability targets, the threat of future Russian aggression, and Ukraine’s recent drone attack on Russia’s war planes.
NATO member states’ defense ministers assembled in Brussels on Wednesday and Thursday for their last meeting before the alliance’s summit, scheduled to take place in The Hague on June 24–25.
Aimed at approving new, country-specific capability targets based on operational plans national leaders agreed upon at the 2023 Vilnius summit, the defense ministers’ meeting happened against the backdrop of stalled peace negotiations between Moscow and Kyiv and fears that the Trump administration is less willing to defend NATO allies than previous U.S. administrations.
A senior NATO official told journalists that the operational plans for deterrence and defense across Europe are a new step for the alliance, as such plans in the past have always focused on operations in other regions. The capability targets, he explained, have been apportioned according to each country’s role in the operational plans. “This is a historic landmark in the rebuilding of our collective capability to deter and defend the Alliance against all threats,” the official said.
The official also underscored that these targets are focused on the near term. “We’re not asking allies to regenerate those capabilities that we used to have during the Cold War, for instance, in 10 years from now,” he said. “We’re asking them for a very substantive effort in the next five to 10 years to make sure that our deterrents remain effective, mostly towards Russia.”
The bitter truth is that events in Russia affect your life, too. Help Meduza continue to bring news from Russia to readers around the world by setting up a monthly donation.
These efforts, he said, will include investments in equipment, doctrines, and personnel, as well as “the drumbeat of training and exercises that are sufficient for Russia to understand” that threatening NATO territory would come at a cost far outweighing any potential gain.
“Given the speed of reconstitution of Russia’s forces, [this] has to happen in the next five to 10 years,” he underscored.
Trump’s magic number
Ministers also discussed the alliance’s defense spending benchmark, which has been set at two percent of GDP since 2014. Just before the start of his second term in January, U.S. President Donald Trump called for NATO to more than double that target to five percent — a figure that exceeds the current defense spending of any member state.
Though initially seen as implausible, the five percent goal is now expected to be approved at the Hague Summit later this month, albeit with a more flexible definition of what constitutes “defense spending.” In May, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte proposed splitting the target into 3.5 percent for “core military spending” and 1.5 percent for broader defense-related investments, such as transportation infrastructure upgrades and cybersecurity. He suggested 2032 as the target year for reaching that level.
Following closed-door talks with NATO defense ministers on Thursday, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said countries were “very close, almost near consensus” on the five percent target. Later, during the meeting’s closing press conference, Rutte formally announced the proposal for discussion at the Hague Summit, though he declined to specify a deadline.
Throughout the event, Rutte and other NATO officials sought to shift attention away from the headline figure, instead emphasizing the importance of capability targets tied directly to the alliance’s operational plans.
“People sometimes think that in The Hague, we’ll discuss a percentage of GDP spending on defense,” Rutte told journalists on Thursday morning. “That is not true. What we will decide in The Hague, what we will spend on defense going forward, the new defense investment plan — [all of this] is rooted in what we need in terms of the hard capabilities. So that’s why it’s so important that today we decide on the capability targets.”
While NATO leaders publicly praised the U.S. president and denied any rift between the alliance and the White House, the Trump administration’s actions during the two-day event left some room for doubt.
On Thursday, Defense Secretary Hegseth did not attend a meeting of NATO’s Ukraine Defense Contact Group (UDCG) — the first time a U.S. defense secretary has skipped the gathering since its creation in 2022. “Let’s not forget, these meetings take place most of the time in Europe, so it will not always be possible for U.S. officials to participate in every meeting,” Rutte said.
Hours later, Trump announced on social media that he had held a phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin. According to the post, the two leaders discussed Operation Spiderweb, Ukraine’s unprecedented drone attack on bombers stationed at airfields across Russia carried out four days earlier.
Though there were reportedly no casualties, and the targeted planes have been used to launch attacks on civilians throughout Ukraine, Trump appeared not to draw a distinction between aggressor and victim in his post, saying they also discussed “various other attacks that have been taking place by both sides.” He also noted that Putin said he will “have to respond” to the attack — language that in the past has preceded Russian attacks on Ukrainian cities.
‘Hats off to Ukraine’
NATO leaders did not comment publicly on Trump’s post, but they did have plenty to say about Operation Spiderweb itself.
At a press conference with Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov after the UDCG meeting, U.K. Defense Secretary John Healey and German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius both praised the operation.
“Rustem, you have shown that you are capable of defending yourselves, and you are doing it prudently and effectively,” Healey told his Ukrainian counterpart. “Congratulations to that really impressive operation.”
Pistorius added that Operation Spiderweb “reminds us that Ukraine can inflict deep damage on the Russian military” and shows that “Ukraine is very much in this fight and determined to prevail.” He continued, “Hats off to Ukraine for Spider’s Web.”
NATO’s Rutte stopped short of directly praising the operation but noted that the targeted bombers had been used in “indiscriminate, unprovoked attacks on innocent Ukrainian civilians, cities, etc.” He then reiterated that Ukraine has NATO’s “full support.”
European leaders, increasingly concerned that Moscow may attempt a direct assault on NATO territory in the coming years, have reason to find the operation encouraging. A senior NATO official confirmed that Western intelligence suggests that Operation Spiderweb damaged 40 Russian aircraft, fully destroying at least 10–13 of them — figures consistent with Kyiv’s claims. According to Ukraine’s military intelligence agency, this amounts to $7 billion in damage to Russia’s bomber fleet.
The operation, the official said, highlights a worsening dilemma for Russia when it comes to protecting its long-range aviation assets and allocating its air defense. It also “shows real Russian vulnerabilities at a time when Putin still thinks that he is winning the war,” especially as it limits Moscow’s ability to target Ukraine with cruise missiles, the official said.
Threats and readiness
Earlier this week, German Defense Chief Carsten Breuer told reporters that Russia is producing enough tanks to potentially launch an attack on one of the Baltic countries — all three of which are NATO members — by 2029 or earlier.
The next day, U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced that the country’s armed forces would shift to “war-fighting readiness,” ahead of the release of a major defense policy report that names Russia as one of the U.K.’s primary threats.
These statements are the latest in a growing chorus of warnings from European leaders about the persistent threat Putin’s Russia poses — one that isn’t expected to subside if a peace agreement is reached with Ukraine, as this would free Russia’s military capacity for potential aggression elsewhere.
Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are frequently assumed to be an obvious target for such aggression. Indeed, these countries and their neighbors are already dealing with Kremlin aggression, having seen a sharp rise in Russian sabotage attacks in recent years, according to a March 2025 report.
Asked by Meduza whether NATO is prepared for a full-scale attack on a Baltic member state, Rutte was unequivocal. “First of all, we are always prepared for every eventuality,” he said. “Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin should know that if he would try [such an attack], our reaction would be devastating.”
Still, the dramatic shift in Washington’s posture toward its allies during the first five months of Trump’s second term has prompted growing concern in Europe over the possibility of a future without U.S. support. A June 2 report from the Atlantic Council concluded that “[if] Russia were to move rapidly against the Baltic states, NATO could not defend its territory effectively without the United States.”
As the Hague Summit approaches, the pressure on European NATO members to reach a defense spending agreement and keep the U.S. on its side couldn’t be higher.
Report by Sam Breazeale