n Sept. 1. “We also need the capacity to manage crises and to work with partners to help build stability.”

“So at the summit, we will ensure that the alliance remains ready, able and willing to defend all allies against any attack,” he continued.

As for Russia, Putin and his administration remain adamant in their opposition to the expansion of NATO into any nation once part of the Soviet orbit. On Aug. 30, Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov told Russia’s TVC television that “if this organization [NATO] comes closer to our border, naturally, Russia will be forced to take measures to ensure its security.”

With a resurgent Russia engaged in open low-intensity warfare in the Ukraine and a defiant Putin unscathed by economic sanctions leveled by the United States and the European Union, NATO now must show its members and the world that it offers a credible plan for collective security.

“This is the most operationally important summit since the fall of the [Berlin] wall because things are changing so fundamentally with Russia, and the changes are in the operational zone,” retired U.S. Navy admiral James Stavridis, former NATO supreme allied commander and currently the dean of The Fletcher School at Tufts University, said in a written statement.

However, at the same time NATO leaders debate how to maintain a robust alliance strategy the consensus seems whatever NATO does it cannot provoke a face-to-face confrontation between the alliance and Russia. In short, many leaders are reluctant to fight Cold War 2.0.

The agenda for the two-day summit is jam-packed—it includes discussion of Afghanistan, terrorism and whether member nations are willing to pay for additional measures. However, the crisis in Ukraine and the nature of NATO’s future relationship with Russia is taking center stage.

“We must agree on long-term measures to strengthen our ability to respond quickly to any threat, to reassure those allies who fear for their own country’s security and to deter any Russian aggressio