The aim for NATO member states remains to agree on the name of the next secretary general as soon as possible. The officer will replace Norway’s Jens Stoltenberg this autumn. The main favorite, Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte, is still not fully confirmed in the eyes of all allies. Three countries, led by Hungary, have withheld their authorization, complicating a deal that NATO would like to seal ahead of the July summit of Allied leaders in Washington from the 9th to the 11th.
Rutte, who resigned last year after a government crisis triggered by migration policy and has since served in a caretaker capacity, enjoys the backing of a broad majority of allied countries, including the United States, Germany, France, Spain, and Estonia. “To build a strong NATO we must keep our focus on Russia, increase defense spending, support Ukraine’s membership, and maintain geographic balance. I have discussed these priorities in depth with Mark Rutte, and he commits to them. Estonia could back him as NATO secretary general,” confirmed the Estonian prime minister, Kaja Kallas, whose name was floated last year as a possible candidate for the alliance’s top post.
Pushed by the accumulating support for the Dutch candidate in recent months, comments from early March by Romanian president Klaus Iohannis about taking on a “greater responsibility” in Euro-Atlantic security and competing for the post—where Stoltenberg has led for a decade—have “delayed,” according to allied diplomatic sources, the search for a consensus candidate and stirred up resistance from Hungary to back Rutte, while urging consideration of an alternative.
Orbán’s Stand
[The Hungarian foreign minister, Peter Szijjártó, has repeatedly stated that Hungary will not back a candidate it views as having tried to bend Hungary, referring to the Dutch nominee. NATO members are cautious about predicting how long Viktor Orbán’s government will hold out and whether a consensus can be reached before late April. So far, beyond Hungary, Romania and Slovakia have also withheld support for Rutte. “We aimed to approve the decision by the end of April to avoid mixing it with EU leadership negotiations. There is still time, but it is hard to say how far Hungary will go,” allied officials say about the Hungarian prime minister, who has begun applying the same negotiation tactics used in European talks to the NATO process.
“There is an ongoing debate across the Alliance about the qualifications of these two leaders, and we will keep weighing the pros and cons of each until we reach a consensus, ideally in the coming weeks,” acknowledged the United States ambassador, Julianne Smith, ahead of the NATO foreign ministers meeting in Brussels on Wednesday and Thursday. “We do not know the exact moment. Certainly, we want a resolution as soon as possible. At the latest, we would like this settled at the Washington summit,” she added, noting that the United States fully supports Rutte. Other diplomatic sources do not rule out the possibility of seeking a fresh candidate, even reviving Kallas’ name if the stalemate persists.
Another major question is whether Hungary’s stance could block a quick resolution or prompt a broader rethink of the alliance’s leadership. The discussions have stretched beyond one country and moved into a broader bargaining arena, with several capitals signaling that a transparent, credible choice is crucial for NATO’s political direction and its deterrence posture in a tense security environment.
As the debate continues, the bloc’s members stress the need to balance strategic priorities: reinforcing deterrence, maintaining credible defense spending, and ensuring NATO remains united on Russia’s aggression and Europe’s security architecture, while also signaling a clear commitment to Ukraine’s eventual path to membership. The outcome remains uncertain, but the drive to finish the process before the Washington summit reflects NATO’s preference for decisiveness and cohesion in its leadership at a pivotal moment for European security.
The alliance’s leadership discussion underscores how leadership selection in multinational organizations can become a litmus test for unity and strategic direction. Allies are weighing credibility, experience, and the ability to navigate complex national interests, as they look for a secretary general who can steer NATO through evolving challenges, maintain alliance solidarity, and project a coherent message to both partners and adversaries alike.