In July, a NATO summit was held in Turkey. US leader Donald Trump was also invited to the meeting. According to Trump, Turkish leader Recep Tayyip Erdoğan personally called him and invited him to the meeting. Trump announced that he would go to Turkey as a sign of respect for Erdoğan.
Trump, who highly values Erdoğan's personal qualities, called him a friend and expressed his sympathy for him.
“Turkey is a NATO member. Some people don't take that into account. I will take a step that will make him happy,” the US president noted. Trump's recent statements, and the mention that the F-35 issue is being legally investigated, create the impression of a new beginning in US-Turkey relations.
In a statement to Modern.az, Turkish security expert Abdullah Ağar stated that the issue should be approached from a broader perspective, not just through Trump's statements:
“Donald Trump has some important statements. Both the issue of providing engines for the KAAN project earlier, and surprising statements regarding the F-35 program that will make Turks very happy, are on the agenda. However, here the issue should be approached from a broader framework, not just through Trump's statements. It is important to correctly define that framework. This framework includes political will, legal obstacles, strategic needs, and finally, the issue of geopolitical balance. That is, when looking at the F-35 issue from the US perspective, political will, legal restrictions, strategic needs, and geopolitical balance must be evaluated together. From this perspective, the main question is: “Can Trump's approach lead to the formation of a new strategic security architecture?” I think this is one of the most important questions. Because the Karabakh war, the Russia-Ukraine war, the Gaza war, and the Iran-Israel confrontation have fundamentally changed the global geopolitical balance. As a result, strategic capabilities and security concepts are also being reshaped.”
The expert noted that several key directions come to the fore against the backdrop of changes:
“These directions include the security of the Black Sea, the future of the Russia-Ukraine war, the US's long-term plans regarding this war, the new order that will emerge in the Middle East after Iran, processes in the Eastern Mediterranean, the sustainability of NATO's southern flank, the geopolitical line the US is trying to build against China via the Middle East, the alliance system in the Middle East, the South Caucasus and the Balkans, especially the new balance to be established between Turkey and Greece. All of these are extremely critical topics. For this very reason, the NATO event to be held in Ankara is of great importance for both the US and Turkey. Because, although not openly visible between the parties, there is a serious crisis of trust. Although an image of political rapprochement is created, the problem of mutual trust remains, especially against the backdrop of the Eastern Mediterranean, Greece, the Israel-Iran war, and other regional issues. The US sees Turkey's geopolitical importance and irreplaceable role. At the same time, events in the region are somewhat distancing Turkey from the Atlantic bloc.
For this reason, three main needs arise for the US: rebuilding trust, forming a new strategic cooperation model, and maintaining geopolitical balance. At the center of this process are currently the F-35 project and the engine issue for KAAN. From a technical perspective, there are serious legal obstacles to the delivery of F-35s to Turkey. Not only legislation, but also the influence of Greek and Israeli lobbies play an important role here. In addition, a positive opinion must be submitted to the US Congress. The sale of aircraft to Turkey must be confirmed as technically and politically appropriate. Currently, it seems that certain steps are being taken primarily towards easing sanctions. This process includes the modernization of F-16s, the provision of spare parts, missile sales, and the reactivation of other joint projects. Progress is expected in these areas. However, the S-400 issue still remains the main legal obstacle from the US perspective. There is currently no clear mechanism on how this problem will be resolved. Because the S-400 issue is not only geopolitical but also a matter of national pride for Turkey. In fact, the acquisition of S-400s was also a result of the crisis of trust that arose at the time. Therefore, to solve the problem fundamentally, the crisis of trust must first be overcome and Turkey's national interests must be taken into account. At the same time, it must be accepted that Turkey is a state seeking strategic autonomy and pursuing a policy of balance. Turkey cannot overcome the obstacles related to the F-35 itself. The US administration must do this. Because not only the White House, but also Congress, the Pentagon, Greek and Israeli lobbies, as well as the positions of some NATO countries play a role here.”
According to A. Ağar, the main issue is what position Turkey will be placed in the future security architecture:
“If Turkey can integrate F-35, “Eurofighter”, KAAN, unmanned combat aerial vehicles, and national air defense systems into the same system, it will have one of the strongest air forces in Europe. This may not be a desirable outcome for some countries. For example, Greece had long-term plans to gain air superiority. Turkey's acquisition of F-35s could effectively thwart those plans. On the other hand, NATO's southern flank would be significantly strengthened, and Turkey would become a more important actor for US regional strategies. If Washington does not provide these opportunities, Turkey will continue its own path. KAAN, Kızılelma, ANKA-3, new generation electronic warfare systems, and other national projects will further increase Turkey's strategic independence. This will create a new reality for the US. I think the issue is not just the sale of F-35s. This is part of a larger struggle over how Turkey's future role within NATO will be defined.
The real question is not “Will Turkey buy F-35s?” but “How much strategic decision-making independence will Turkey be able to maintain while acquiring F-35s and other Western weapon systems?” Because Turkey is developing its national systems, expanding its defense industry, and pursuing a policy of strategic autonomy. Rapprochement with the US is possible, and signs of this are visible. However, the decisive issue is whether Ankara will turn this rapprochement into a relationship of dependence or a multi-centric power model. Finally, the most important question must be asked: “Will the F-35 truly be a purchased combat aircraft for Turkey, or will it become a 'rented' platform with limited use?” The answer to this lies in the issue of access to source codes. If Turkey cannot gain access to the source codes of F-35s and other Western weapon systems, it will not have full sovereign control over those systems.
If it can gain access, then it will be able to use these systems in accordance with its strategic interests. For example, the US provides Israel with access to certain technical capabilities of the F-35, F-16, and F-15 platforms it sells. For this reason, the main question for me is: “If the US sells F-35s to Turkey, will it give Ankara access to the source codes of those aircraft, or not?” I think this is the most important issue at the center of all discussions. The issue is not just about F-35s. This is a geopolitical issue that runs on deeper levels. I think it can be metaphorically expressed as follows:
Perhaps Turkey is not a tuna fish roaming the global oceans. But it is a bluefish, moving in a vital geography extending from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean, from the Aegean Sea to the Caspian, from the Caucasus to the Balkans, from the Middle East to Central Asia; one that does not succumb to herd psychology, reads its surroundings well, strikes hard and fast when necessary, and is a proud warrior of the seas. From the US perspective, this is precisely the main issue: Can it accept this independent, autonomous state with its own decision-making mechanism as it is and keep it by its side? Or will it lose it due to policies that create distrust and the reflex to keep everything under control, and then merely look back? I think the essence of today's discussions revolves around this very question.”
Turkish General Yücel Karauz stated that a new phase could be laid with Trump's visit to Turkey:
“However, this does not directly mean “Turkey will immediately buy F-35s.” The NATO Summit to be held in Ankara will demonstrate that Turkey is no longer just a “border country” of the Alliance, but has become a central ally on the Black Sea–Middle East–Caucasus–Eastern Mediterranean line. NATO announced that the summit will be held in Ankara on July 7–8, 2026. As for the F-35 issue, the situation can be evaluated in three stages. First, the political atmosphere is softening. US Vice President J.D. Vance stated that the possibility of providing F-35 fighters to Turkey is being legally investigated. In addition, the US moving forward with the sale of GE engines for the KAAN project can be seen as a signal of controlled softening and expanding cooperation in defense relations. On the other hand, the main obstacle is still the S-400 issue. The main reason for Turkey's exclusion from the F-35 program was the S-400 air defense missile systems. On the US side, it is believed that as long as the S-400 systems remain active or accessible, there will be serious legal and Congressional obstacles to the delivery of F-35s to Turkey. According to Reuters, the Turkish side stated in December 2025 that there was no change in its position regarding the S-400s. Currently, the most realistic scenario will be a new negotiation mechanism, not an immediate handover. At the Ankara Summit, it is possible to form a new military cooperation framework on topics such as engine supply for KAAN, modernization of F-16s, integration of air defense systems, joint production projects, as well as the security of Syria, the Black Sea, and the Eastern Mediterranean. The F-35 issue can play the role of the highest political reward in this process. In my assessment, the probability of F-35s being delivered to Turkey in the short term is low to medium. However, in the medium term, if a controllable solution formula acceptable to the US regarding the S-400s is found, this probability will significantly increase.”
According to the Turkish general, the regional impacts of providing F-35s could be quite significant:
“Turkey's return to the F-35 program could shift the air power balance in the Aegean Sea and the Eastern Mediterranean in Ankara's favor. This would increase deterrence on NATO's southern flank and send an important message to Russia in the direction of the Black Sea. At the same time, it would lead to the emergence of new strategic balance calculations for Israel, Greece, and the Gulf countries.
Ultimately, the NATO event in Ankara could open a new page in Washington-Ankara military relations. However, the key to the F-35 issue lies not in the final protocol of the summit, but in the future status of the S-400s, the position of the US Congress, and whether Washington accepts Turkey as a reliable strategic partner again.”
