On 25 May, the leaders of the Nato member states will gather for the first time since the US elections. The first appearance of an American president before his counterparts is always very interesting, as it is indicative of potential policy changes - even more so this time, as the world faces multiple crises.
The fight against terrorism will likely be at the heart of discussions. The allies need to address one of the biggest threats to citizens' safety, which has manifested itself with multiple terror attacks across European in the last year.
A common approach, focusing on intelligence sharing and effective preventive counter-terrorism steps, will be essential. As an additional measure, the front against ISIS in the Middle East needs to be strengthened, with better coordination among the allies.
There are two main priorities when it comes to the ongoing fight in the Middle East against the so-called Islamic State: stopping any economic activities that, directly or indirectly, benefit ISIS, and supporting the regional groups that fight against it, away from regional geopolitical games.
Another issue that has been on the Alliance's agenda for years is Russia's influence and fears over potential interference. Nato allies ought to be constructive and explore all options, going even further than investing significantly in cyber defence.
At the same time it is important to restart the channels of communication with Russia, as there are multiple global crises that require a lot of attention.
Establishing and maintaining open channels of communication would not be a compromise or a sign of weakness from the part of the alliance.
The will to find a solution to the problems that affect our citizens should not be interpreted as an intention to water down international law, but on the contrary, as a way to manage crises more efficiently before they escalate. This requires communication among the global powers.
Moreover, the heads of state will have to address the challenges arising from more complex and unconventional forms of warfare, most notably hybrid threats and cyberattacks.
History has multiple examples of attempts to us asymmetries that exploit an opponent's weaknesses, leading to complex situations involving regular/irregular and conventional/unconventional tactics.
But in recent years, cyber options have made these challenges even more dangerous. It is important to find a way to protect critical infrastructure and services from hybrid threats and cyberattacks. Such a task would require the coordination of all the member states.
Another issue that has been at the forefront of Nato discussions over the last years is the increase of defence spending to two per cent of the national GDP. Over the last decade we have been relying on the US for our defence, however it is fair to argue that the rest of the allies need to fulfil the commitments made in 2014 in Wales, and reach the agreed two percent target.
It will become significantly easier to confront the existing challenges and threats with a better arsenal, and the only way of doing so is by recognising that safety and security need some investment. This has been pointed out by US President Donald Trump, as well as his predecessors and the Nato Secretary General on numerous occasions - it is a reality Nato members must confront.
At the same time a plethora of new crises that have arisen. Most notably, Turkey's aggressive rhetoric and the violations taking place in the Aegean Sea, along with the countless prosecutions after the coup, has led to the freezing of its EU accession process.
Turkey is an important international actor and it is crucial that it remains dedicated to democracy and willing to cooperate with its allies. In addition, Nato has been instrumental in helping the EU deal with the migration crisis, by sharing intelligence and having military presence in the region.
As the crisis is far from over, and with the lives of thousands of refugees at stake, we need to effectively address the human trafficking network that exists in the region. The alliance's help can be pivotal.
Another crisis is external interference in election procedures, which has raised concerns over the last months. Both the French and US elections are said to have been targets of cyberattacks with candidates' emails leaking to the public.
The extent to which the procedures have been affected is yet to be proven, but the fact is that Nato is, by definition, an alliance of democracies and it needs to be able to provide the tools to safeguard democratic procedures.
Should such tools be developed, even other activities, such as ISIS's crowdfunding campaigns, could be efficiently addressed. That brings us again back to the need for more investment in our capacities and the necessity of a holistic response to hybrid and cyber threats.
Despite these crises, I remain optimistic. I think that the multiple challenges we face will enable Nato allies to recognise the gravity of the situation and provide a response to the questions that are being raised.
We will need to live up to our commitments and increase defence spending. The EU will need to play an important part in this procedure, making sure that any potential effort for a stronger EU defence will complement Nato.