# Turkish defense exports near 11 billion dollars > As the NATO summit opens in Ankara on July 7 and 8, 2026, Turkey can point to an impressive commercial record. According - Author: Maxime Marquette - Publisher: MadMax (https://mad-max.co) - Section: Profile - Published: 2026-07-07 - Canonical URL: https://mad-max.co/en/article/les-exportations-de-defense-turques-frolent-les-11-milliards-de-dollars ## Key takeaways - Exports rose 47.1% from the previous period's 7.4 billion dollars, according to the Anadolu agency, and went to 178 countries. - NATO member states took 6.2 billion dollars, or 57.3% of the total, and the top three destinations are all NATO allies. - The sector's export value reached 65.16 dollars per kilogram, against a 1.62-dollar overall Turkish average, which the author reads as a shift toward higher technology. - The author credits coordination by Turkey's Defense Industries Secretariat and the battlefield reputation of Turkish drones in Ukraine. - Diversification away from US suppliers, linked to uncertainty over long-term American commitment under the Trump administration, is presented as a driver. ## Introduction: Ankara turns diplomacy into industry ### A figure that speaks volumes about NATO's new reality As the **NATO summit** opens in **Ankara** on **July 7 and 8, 2026**, **Turkey** can point to an impressive **commercial** record. According to the **Anadolu** agency, Turkish **defense** and aerospace **exports** reached **10.9 billion** dollars over the twelve months preceding **May 31, 2026**, up **47.1%** from the previous period, which totaled **7.4 billion dollars**. These goods were sold to **178 countries**, a figure that illustrates the scale of the **commercial** network built by Turkey's **defense** **industry** over recent years. But it is the share destined for **NATO** member states that draws the most attention: **6.2 billion** dollars, or **57.3% of the sector's total**, a striking rise for a sector that until recently was still trying to diversify its client base beyond the Atlantic **Alliance**. ### An openly assumed arms-selling diplomacy The timing chosen to release these figures is not neutral. By revealing them just before the **summit** it is hosting, **Turkey** displays its position as an indispensable supplier within the **Alliance**, turning a traditionally diplomatic role into a direct economic lever. The top three destinations for Turkish **defense** and aerospace **exports** are themselves **NATO** allies, a clear signal of the growing integration of Turkish **industry** into the Western defense ecosystem. This dynamic fits into a broader context: **NATO** members are actively seeking to diversify their arms suppliers, driven by persistent uncertainty over long-term American commitment to the **Alliance** under the **Trump** administration. *I'll say it plainly: 47% growth in a single year is not a statistical fluke, it is the result of a deliberate industrial and diplomatic strategy pursued by Ankara. One can criticize certain Turkish geopolitical choices, but there is no denying the commercial effectiveness of this maneuver.* ## Value added that is climbing sharply ### A sector selling for more, not just selling more Beyond volume, one indicator deserves attention: the sector's export value per kilogram reached **65.16 dollars**, compared with an overall Turkish average of just **1.62 dollars** per kilogram across all industries combined. This massive gap shows that Turkey's **defense** **industry** is no longer content exporting entry-level products; it now sells systems with high technological value added. This technological upgrade partly explains why **NATO** countries, historically accustomed to traditional **Western** suppliers, are increasingly turning to Turkish solutions that are competitive on both cost and operational performance. ### Decisive state coordination These commercial results are no accident: they stem from active coordination led by Turkey's **Defense Industries Secretariat**, which has multiplied international contacts, bilateral meetings and industrial **diplomacy** initiatives. This systematic approach has increased the visibility of Turkish companies in foreign markets and created new opportunities for cooperation. **Turkey** is thus positioning itself not only as a supplier of finished products but also as a technological partner capable of building joint production models with its clients, an approach that strengthens long-term loyalty among its military customers. *This shift toward high value added strikes me as the most telling element of this Turkish industrial success story. Selling for more per kilogram means selling more technology, not just more volume, and that is a sign of industrial maturity we would be wrong to underestimate.* ## A summit host that monetizes its position ### Ankara at the center of NATO's diplomatic map Hosting the **NATO summit** gives **Turkey** exceptional diplomatic visibility, one that **Ankara** seems determined to turn into a concrete **commercial** advantage. The release of these record figures just before the summit's opening reinforces the image of a country no longer content with a strategic geographic role between Europe and Asia, but one that also claims a leading industrial role within the **Alliance**. This dual role, diplomatic host and military supplier, places **Turkey** in a singular position among **NATO** members, able to weigh in on both political discussions and the military procurement decisions of other allied capitals. ### A position not without tension This Turkish **commercial** rise nonetheless coexists with persistent tensions, notably over the matter of Russian **S-400** systems still held by **Ankara**, which blocks its full reintegration into the **F-35** program according to several American lawmakers. This contradiction illustrates the complexity of Turkey's position: an increasingly indispensable **commercial** partner, yet still subject to security reservations from certain allies. Despite these ongoing frictions, the overall **commercial** momentum behind Turkish **exports** does not appear to be slowing, carried by growing allied demand that, for now, seems to outweigh concerns tied to the Russian equipment still in **Ankara**'s possession. *I remain clear-eyed about Turkey's contradictions: a country that sells massively to NATO while still holding onto controversial Russian systems. This ambiguity deserves to be named plainly rather than swept under the rug of a simple commercial success story.* ## A sector carried by Baykar and Aselsan ### The spearheads of Turkish industry While the official figures from the **Anadolu** agency do not detail the precise contribution of each company, the surge in Turkish **defense** exports rests largely on groups that have become world references in the sector, particularly in drones and defense electronics systems. These companies built their international reputation notably through their documented role in the Ukrainian conflict, where their equipment demonstrated proven operational effectiveness on the ground. This reputation, earned on real theaters of operation, is a powerful commercial argument for winning over new clients within the **Alliance**, who are seeking equipment whose effectiveness has already been tested in wartime conditions rather than mere laboratory demonstrations. ### A reputation forged on Ukrainian soil The use of Turkish drones by Ukrainian forces since the start of the Russian invasion has considerably strengthened the international credibility of Turkey's defense industry. This operational validation, achieved in the most demanding context imaginable, that of a high-intensity war against a major military power, constitutes a commercial asset that few competitors can claim with the same legitimacy. It is this combination of proven combat performance and competitive pricing that largely explains the growing appetite of **NATO** countries for Turkish equipment, in a context of widespread rearmament against the Russian threat. *I believe Turkey's commercial success owes a great deal, indirectly, to the courage and effectiveness of Ukrainian forces who tested this equipment under the worst possible conditions. There is a form of strategic irony in watching Ukrainian resistance become, in spite of itself, a sales pitch for a third country's industry.* ## The broader context of Western rearmament ### Supplier diversification has become a necessity Turkey's commercial rise fits into a deeper trend observed across the entire Atlantic **Alliance**: the need to diversify military supply sources in the face of Western production chains sometimes strained by demand tied to support for **Ukraine** and the broader rearmament of the European continent since 2022. This diversification does not challenge the central role of American and European defense industries, but it does illustrate a pragmatic evolution: faced with security urgency, Western capitals increasingly favor efficiency and delivery speed, criteria on which Turkish industry has managed to position itself favorably. ### American uncertainty that benefits Ankara The sometimes contradictory signals sent by the **Trump** administration regarding long-term American commitment to **NATO** have accelerated this quest for diversification among European allies. Without calling into question current American military support for Ukraine, this structural uncertainty is pushing several capitals to stop relying exclusively on a single supplier, however powerful it may be. Turkey, thanks to its geographic position, its expanding industry and its status as summit host, finds itself ideally placed to capture part of this diversification demand, further strengthening its economic influence within the Alliance. *I'll stay measured on Trump: his administration is, for now, maintaining the architecture of military support for Ukraine, which deserves to be acknowledged. But the uncertainty he generates about long-term American commitment has concrete consequences, such as this accelerated diversification toward suppliers like Turkey.* ## What this means for the Alliance's cohesion ### An industrial interdependence that strengthens ties Paradoxically, this growing dependence of several **NATO** countries on Turkish exports could strengthen, rather than weaken, the **Alliance**'s cohesion. Greater industrial interdependence among members creates concrete shared interests that go beyond mere political statements, particularly in a context of persistent Russian threat that requires a rapid, coordinated collective response. This commercial dynamic could also push **Turkey** to align its foreign policy more closely with the **Alliance**'s collective priorities, insofar as its economic success now largely depends on the trust granted by its Western partners. ### A test for Western industrial solidarity The **Ankara** summit offers an opportunity to gauge whether this growing commercial interdependence also translates into stronger Turkish political and military commitments to the **Alliance**'s shared priorities, notably continued support for **Ukraine** against Russian aggression. It is this interplay between commercial interest and strategic solidarity that will ultimately determine whether Turkey's industrial rise is a lasting asset for Western cohesion or simply a fleeting economic opportunity. *I believe the real question raised by this Turkish commercial success is not economic but political: will Ankara turn this industrial achievement into a firmer strategic commitment to Ukraine and collective deterrence against Russia, or will it continue its usual realpolitik between Washington and Moscow.* ## The gray areas that remain ### Figures that do not tell the whole story Despite the precision of the figures published by the **Anadolu** agency, several gray areas remain regarding the exact breakdown of these exports among different types of equipment, as well as the precise identity of all the clients within **NATO**. This partial opacity is common in the defense sector, where sensitive contractual details often remain confidential for legitimate strategic reasons. This methodological limit calls for analytical caution: the overall figures, however impressive, do not make it possible to precisely assess the impact of each individual contract on the **Alliance**'s collective defense capabilities. ### Imperfect transparency but clear trends Despite these limits, the overall trend remains beyond dispute: **Turkey** is establishing itself as a major defense industrial player within **NATO**, with growth that far outpaces that of many traditional Western competitors. This reality deserves to be documented rigorously, without giving in to either starry-eyed enthusiasm or systematic skepticism toward Turkish industrial ambitions. It is this balanced approach that allows for a full understanding of the stakes at the **Ankara** summit, where diplomacy, arms trade and strategic solidarity are more intertwined than ever. *I remain committed to this methodological rigor: acknowledging a real commercial success without claiming to know every contractual detail that legitimately remains beyond the reach of public journalistic analysis.* ## What this changes for Baykar and Aselsan ### Order books that keep growing For groups like **Baykar** and **Aselsan**, this commercial boom translates concretely into order books that keep expanding within **NATO** itself. These companies, long seen as regional players, are now being courted by European military staffs that previously sourced their equipment almost exclusively from established American or Western European suppliers. This transformation did not happen overnight: it is the result of a decade of sustained investment in research and development, combined with a clear political will to make Turkey's defense industry a pillar of the national economy, in the same way aerospace or the automotive sector has been for other industrial powers. ### A competition that reshuffles the deck The arrival of **Baykar** and **Aselsan** among the preferred suppliers of several European armies is also forcing traditional Western manufacturers to revisit their prices and delivery times, competitive pressure that, ultimately, could benefit the entire **Alliance**'s armed forces by accelerating collective production rates. This redistribution of market share within **NATO** illustrates a broader phenomenon: the war in **Ukraine** has not only changed Western military doctrines, it has also reshuffled the industrial map of an entire strategic economic sector, to the benefit of new players like Turkey. *I see in this rise of Baykar and Aselsan a healthy wake-up call for traditional Western manufacturers: complacency no longer has a place in a context of urgent rearmament against Russia, and Turkish competition could well force a welcome acceleration that benefits deliveries to Ukraine as a whole.* ## Conclusion: a summit at the crossroads of commerce and strategy ### Ankara, between diplomatic host and arms seller The **NATO** summit in **Ankara** shows just how much the line between diplomacy and military commerce is blurring within the Atlantic **Alliance**. The **10.9 billion dollars** in Turkish exports announced just before the summit's opening are no mere calendar coincidence, but a calculated demonstration of the place **Turkey** intends to occupy in the Western defense architecture of coming years. ### A dynamic to watch beyond the numbers It remains to be seen whether this Turkish commercial success will translate into a stronger political and military commitment to the **Alliance**'s shared strategic priorities, particularly support for **Ukraine** against a Russian aggression that, four years after it began, continues to redraw the industrial and diplomatic balances of the entire continent. *I'll close on a simple conviction: the arms trade is never neutral, and Ankara knows this better than anyone. Let's hope this Turkish industrial success translates, on the ground, into faster deliveries to a Ukraine that has no time to lose against Russia.* **By Maxime Marquette, columnist** ## Columnist's transparency note ### Editorial stance I am not a journalist but a **columnist and analyst**. My expertise lies in observing and analysing the geopolitical, economic and strategic dynamics that shape our world. My work is to take political strategies apart, to understand global economic movements, to put the decisions of international actors in context and to offer analytical perspectives on the changes that are redefining our societies. I do not claim the cold objectivity of traditional journalism, which stops at reporting facts. **I claim analytical clarity**, rigorous interpretation and a deep understanding of the complex issues that concern us all. My role is to give meaning to the facts, to place them in their historical and strategic context, and to offer a critical reading of events. ### Method and sources This text keeps the basic distinction between **verified facts and interpretive analysis**. The rule never changes: a factual claim is published only when a verifiable source supports it, and the sources this article actually used are listed under **Sources**, never here. **Primary source families** used by the publication, when the story has them: official statements from governments and international institutions, public statements by political leaders, reports from intergovernmental organisations, dispatches from recognised international news agencies. **Secondary source families**: specialised publications, internationally recognised news media, analyses from established research institutions, reports from industry organisations. When an article cites statistical, economic or geopolitical data, it comes from the institutions that produce it (intergovernmental organisations, central banks, national statistics offices), and the exact institution is named under **Sources**. ### Nature of the analysis The analyses, interpretations and perspectives in the analytical sections of this article are a **critical, contextual synthesis** based on the information available, the trends observed and the expert comments cited in the sources consulted. My role is to interpret these facts, to set them in the context of today's geopolitical and economic dynamics, and to give them a coherent meaning within the larger story of the changes shaping our time. These analyses reflect expertise built through continuous observation of international affairs and an understanding of the strategic mechanisms that drive global actors. This article describes a documented state of affairs on its publication date, not a prediction: later developments may shift its outlook. No update is promised in advance; when an article is corrected or completed, the change is dated in the text. ## Sources ### Primary sources - Anadolu Agency — Turkish defense exports near 11 billion dollars, July 1, 2026 - Anadolu Agency — Türkiye signs NATO defense industry deals, July 2026 - Ministry of Defense of Ukraine — official page ### Secondary sources - Reuters — Turkey targets more defence sales as West rearms, June 5, 2026 - Foreign Policy — NATO and defense industry coverage - Axios — geopolitical and security analysis --- Source: Maxime Marquette, MadMax. When citing, name the author and link https://mad-max.co/en/article/les-exportations-de-defense-turques-frolent-les-11-milliards-de-dollars