Abhishek G BhayaNATO's commitment to spend more on defence dominated headlines at this year's summit in Ankara. But beneath the debate over budgets, military hardware and burden-sharing, experts say the alliance is undergoing a more profound transformation — one that could redefine how it approaches security in the decades ahead.
The concept, increasingly referred to by analysts as "NATO 3.0," reflects a shift from an alliance built primarily around collective military defence towards one focused on technological resilience, industrial capacity and emerging domains such as artificial intelligence, cyber security and cognitive warfare.
While the term does not yet form part of NATO's official doctrine, it featured prominently in discussions among researchers and security experts attending the ‘NATO Allies in Ankara’ forum held alongside the summit.
Even Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan used the term in his opening address at the summit. "In order for the 'NATO 3.0' vision to achieve its goals, allies must end the restrictions they impose on each other," he said.
A changing alliance
Kadir Temiz, president of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies (ORSAM), said NATO's next phase must be understood in the context of an increasingly complex security environment.
"Everybody is discussing NATO 3.0," he told TRT World. "The mainstream idea is to rebuild NATO from this perspective."
For Temiz, the first pillar of NATO 3.0 is renewed collective action built around a more balanced sharing of responsibilities among allies.
"The first important issue in NATO 3.0 is collective action through new dimensions, including the European burden-sharing perspective," he said.
The second is adapting to an expanding list of security challenges that now stretch well beyond Russia's war in Ukraine.
"The Middle East, the Balkans, Central Asia, the Russia-Ukraine war — they are all combining into a collective challenge for NATO members," Temiz said.
According to him, discussions in Ankara reflected growing optimism that the alliance is beginning to rethink its long-term strategic posture.
Beyond tanks and missiles
Erman Akilli, professor of international relations at Ankara Haci Bayram Veli University, said NATO's transformation is being driven as much by technological disruption as by geopolitics.
"The battlefield is changing," he said. "It is not all about physical force anymore. Algorithms, data and computing power are directly affecting the battlefield."
Akilli pointed to recent conflicts, including the war involving Iran, where US officials highlighted the growing use of non-kinetic capabilities alongside conventional military operations.
He argued that artificial intelligence, quantum technologies and advanced computing are becoming as strategically important as traditional military platforms.
"When we talk about AI and cutting-edge technologies, we often think they belong to the future. No — they are already here," he said. "We are already living in a cognitive environment."
From collective security to collective resilience
Akilli believes the alliance's founding principle of collective defence under Article 5 remains essential — but no longer sufficient.
"NATO has been built on collective security," he said. "But it must transform into collective resilience."
In his view, future security will increasingly depend on member states' ability to protect their digital infrastructure, technological supply chains, and data sovereignty.
"If a state cannot control its citizens' data, lacks algorithmic authority, computing power or the ability to produce semiconductors and chips, it becomes vulnerable to systemic shocks," he warned.
That, he argued, fundamentally changes the meaning of deterrence.
"In the future, NATO's deterrence will not be measured by the strongest ally's technological capacity. It will be measured by the technological resilience of its most digitally vulnerable member."
Defence innovation and industry as strategic power
The alliance's agreement to significantly increase defence spending provides the financial framework for this transition.
Under plans agreed by allies, members aim to spend 5 percent of GDP on defence, with 3.5 percent directed towards core military capabilities and the remaining 1.5 percent allocated to areas such as innovation, infrastructure and resilience.
Akilli argued that this second component could prove just as significant as traditional military expenditure.
"The innovation part of burden-sharing is becoming more and more important," he said.
Türkiye, he noted, has already made significant investments in indigenous defence technologies and is well positioned to contribute to NATO's technological ambitions.
The growing importance of defence industrial capacity also emerged as a recurring theme throughout discussions in Ankara.
Defne Arslan, Senior Director and Founder of the Washington-based Atlantic Council's Türkiye Programmes, said Europe's push to strengthen its own defence industry is opening new opportunities for closer cooperation with Türkiye.
She pointed to growing defence partnerships involving Türkiye, Italy and the United Kingdom, as well as collaboration between Turkish drone manufacturer Baykar and Italy's Leonardo.
"I think Türkiye will play an important role as Europe builds its defence capacity," she said.
She also highlighted NATO announcements on expanding satellite systems, radar capabilities and multinational industrial cooperation as examples of the Alliance moving beyond procurement towards long-term industrial integration.
Türkiye's and NATO 3.0
Temiz argued that Türkiye enters this new phase of NATO from a position of relative strength.
For decades, he noted, Ankara has steadily invested in its defence industry while expanding exports across Europe, Africa, the Middle East and Asia.
"Türkiye is ready," he said, referring to burden-sharing and increased defence spending.
But he cautioned that military capabilities alone will not solve today's security challenges.
"What we need is more diplomacy, more dialogue and more negotiation," Temiz said.
Several experts argued that NATO 3.0 is not only about technology but also about expanding the alliance's understanding of security itself.
Temiz said energy, food and climate security are becoming integral parts of a more comprehensive security framework.
Similarly, Akilli argued that hybrid threats and cognitive warfare require NATO to think beyond conventional military deterrence.
"The cognitive warfare is happening even while we are talking right now," he said.
