In terms of weaknesses, I think a major one is the distinction I made between a military strategy, which NATO has the muscle memory and the mechanisms to develop, versus a political strategy. NATO can be a coordination body for that strategy, and the military strategy has to align with the political strategy, but ultimately NATO doesn't have the same authorities in that space. My observation would be that a number of different countries in the alliance have a different vision of what the outcome that we would like looks like.
There are good reasons that this debate shouldn't be had in public. However, I think constructive convening, whether that be by Canada or others who in some ways don't antagonize the different opinions in the alliance on that particular topic, could be very constructive in hosting and building a common understanding of where the alliance is trying to get to, not just what the alliance is trying to prevent in the short term.