# F-35 jets for Turkey, the card Trump plays before Ankara > Just days before the NATO summit scheduled for July 7 and 8 in Ankara, Donald Trump hinted that he might authorize the - Author: Maxime Marquette - Publisher: MadMax (https://mad-max.co) - Section: Reportage - Published: 2026-07-06 - Canonical URL: https://mad-max.co/en/article/les-f-35-pour-la-turquie-la-carte-que-trump-abat-avant-ankara ## Introduction: a last-minute twist before the **NATO summit** ### A **file** frozen since **2019** resurfaces abruptly Just days before the **NATO summit** scheduled for **July 7 and 8** in **Ankara**, **Donald Trump** hinted that he might authorize the sale of **F-35** **fighter jets** to **Turkey**, a file frozen since **2019** after Ankara's **purchase** of the Russian **S-400** air **defense** system. Asked directly about the matter, the American president replied that he would **probably do something** to make Turkish president **Recep Tayyip Erdogan** very happy, according to remarks reported on **July 1, 2026**. Vague as that statement may be, it reopens a **dispute** now **seven years** old that cost **Turkey** its place in the **F-35** development **program** and froze delivery of more than **a hundred aircraft** ordered for roughly **eleven billion dollars**. *From the very first lines of this story, one question stands out: is Trump improvising a new foreign policy through offhand remarks, or was the **diplomatic** groundwork already laid well before the Ankara summit.* ### Why this file matters so much to NATO **Turkey** remains a **military pillar** of the **Atlantic Alliance**, fielding NATO's second-largest army by troop numbers. Unfreezing the F-35 sale would send a **strong signal** just days before a summit where **Washington** and its allies want to project an image of **cohesion** against **Russia** and its partners. This file also shows how hard it is to reconcile **sanctions**, **alliances** and **realpolitik** within an **Alliance** that needs all of its **members** united, including those who occasionally flirt with Moscow. *I see in this possible thaw proof that Trump, for once on a military file, is choosing Western cohesion over symbolic punishment, even if the price paid with Turkey remains uncomfortable.* ## The **S-400** dispute, origin of seven years of gridlock ### An American decision rooted in **technology** security **Washington** excluded Turkey from the **F-35** program in 2019 after Ankara acquired the Russian **S-400** system, judging that holding both systems at once would expose the American jet's **stealth technology** to espionage risk. The U.S. **Congress** then legislated to formally bar any sale of **aircraft** to Turkey until the dispute was resolved. **Turkey** had nonetheless taken part in F-35 development since 2002 alongside other NATO countries, and had already received six aircraft before the **embargo**, now stored on American soil without ever reaching their intended Turkish base. ### Ankara refuses to give up the S-400 In **2024**, the **United States** had indicated a sale would remain possible if Turkey simply abandoned its Russian system, an option Ankara has consistently ruled out, since the S-400 is now **durably integrated** into its air-defense setup. This deadlock has fed seven years of diplomatic tension between two allies who are supposed to converge on the essentials. *I understand the security logic behind the 2019 embargo, but I also think an Alliance that punishes its members without ever fixing the underlying problem ends up weakening itself rather than strengthening its cohesion.* ## Turkey's answer: the national **KAAN** fighter ### A program born of American refusal Faced with the American blockade, **Turkey** accelerated development of its own domestically designed fighter, the **KAAN**, a direct **response** to seven years of exclusion from the F-35 program. This project reflects Ankara's determination to no longer depend entirely on Washington's goodwill for its strategic military capabilities. Yet the Trump administration has notified Congress of its intent to sell Turkey dozens of **jet engines** made by **General Electric**, worth more than **700 million dollars**, meant precisely to power this autonomous Turkish fighter. ### A dependency that persists regardless Selling American engines for a jet born in reaction to the American embargo reveals a paradox: even as it seeks to break free, Turkey remains dependent on key components made in the United States, proof that a full technological rupture remains difficult for a NATO ally. *There is something ironic in the fact that the program meant to free Turkey from Washington still depends on American engines, a useful reminder that ambitions of military self-sufficiency quickly run into industrial reality.* ## The Ankara summit, the perfect stage for an **announcement** ### A two-day gathering under high tension The **2026 NATO summit**, set for **July 7 and 8** in Ankara, will bring together dozens of elected representatives, defense ministers and decision-makers from the Alliance's **32 member countries**. Secretary General **Mark Rutte** said discussions would cover the transformation of defense investment, industrial military **innovation**, and continued support for **Ukraine**. According to **Forbes**, NATO allies are expected to announce tens of **billions** of dollars in defense-related deals at the summit, a backdrop that would make any announcement on Turkish F-35s especially symbolic. ### **Erdogan**, **strategic** **host** of a summit with many stakes The fact that Turkey itself is hosting this summit hands **Erdogan** an obvious diplomatic **lever** to extract concessions on the F-35 file, at a moment when Washington is precisely trying to display flawless Western **unity** against Russia. *I find the timing almost cynical, and clever at once: it is hard to imagine a better moment for Erdogan to apply **pressure** on this file than when he himself is hosting every leader of the Alliance.* ## The **5% of GDP** target, backdrop of the summit ### An ambitious **commitment** adopted in **2025** At the 2025 summit, Alliance members had committed to raising **defense** spending to **5% of GDP** by 2035, with 3.5% for pure military equipment and 1.5% for related spending such as cybersecurity and infrastructure. This target replaces the 2% threshold set in 2014, which only 23 of the **32 member countries** had reached by 2025. This ambitious trajectory is already drawing criticism, with countries such as **Spain** refusing to firmly commit to the 5% **target**, while the **Czech Republic**, **Hungary**, **Slovenia** and the **United Kingdom** are struggling to make progress since last year. ### **Rutte** searches for a credible path to the goal NATO's secretary general said he wants to help members build a **credible path** toward the 5% target, a balancing act while several European capitals drag their feet on budget commitments they collectively voted for. *I still think this 5% target is the right direction for the West, but the resistance already visible among several European allies shows that political will remains easier to display than to fund.* ## Ukraine still at the center of discussions ### **Zelensky** expected in Ankara Ukrainian president **Volodymyr Zelensky** will attend this two-day summit, confirming that the Ukrainian file will remain a top priority for the Alliance despite the space taken up by bilateral issues like the Turkish F-35s. Rutte reiterated that **Ukraine's security** remains inseparable from that of all NATO members. Last **April**, Alliance members had already committed **60 billion dollars** in military aid to Ukraine, an amount that adds to the tens of billions already disbursed since Russia's full-scale invasion began in February 2022. ### The American program for reselling weapons to European allies Under the Trump administration, a program was set up allowing American weapons to be sold to European NATO allies, who then transfer them to **Ukraine**, a formula that lets Washington keep supporting Kyiv while generating revenue for the American defense **industry**. *This resale mechanism through European allies strikes me as a clever way to sustain support for Ukraine while defusing domestic American criticism over the direct cost of military aid.* ## Regional precedents: **Israel** and **Greece** ### Two allies without an embargo, for comparison Unlike Turkey, **Israel** has already received 48 of the 75 F-35s it ordered, without ever facing a comparable embargo, while **Greece** awaits delivery of twenty aircraft by 2030. This contrast underscores just how much the Turkish file remains a political exception rather than a simple logistical or industrial question. This regional comparison fuels a sense, on the Turkish side, of a two-speed treatment within the Atlantic Alliance itself, an argument Ankara's **diplomacy** will not fail to raise at the summit. ### A region where the military balance is shifting fast The deterioration of the situation in the **Middle East** has pushed Washington toward a more pragmatic approach to defense cooperation, a factor that could tilt the scales toward easing restrictions on Turkey, an indispensable ally in the region. *I think this more pragmatic approach from Washington is justified by current geopolitical reality, even if it risks reviving accusations of double standards among NATO allies.* ## What NATO's defense innovation push changes in the equation ### The **DIANA** program and technological acceleration Beyond the F-35 file, the Ankara summit is also set to address defense industrial **innovation** across the Alliance, notably through **DIANA**, the Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic, which awarded a research contract in April to a British company specializing in underwater robotics. This innovation drive reflects NATO's determination to cut administrative barriers and speed up the adoption of new military technologies, an issue that reaches far beyond the sole Turkish-American dispute over F-35s. ### An industrial coherence worth preserving Unfreezing the F-35 sale to Turkey would fit into this broader push to **strengthen** the Western **defense industrial base**, where every major contract helps consolidate the military ecosystem of allied countries against strategic rivals. *I believe the West gains more by industrially integrating its allies than by pushing them toward forced self-sufficiency, which ultimately benefits mainly technological competitors like **China** or Russia.* ## Vice President **Vance's** role in the file ### A legal review entrusted to the **Pentagon** Vice President **JD Vance** said the **Pentagon** was currently reviewing the matter from a strictly legal standpoint, since selling F-35s to Turkey remains barred by a **law** passed by Congress and signed by Trump himself. This **legal** framework complicates any spontaneous announcement, even though the president has raised it publicly. Trump himself acknowledged the complexity of the situation, saying simply that his administration would **find a solution**, a phrase that leaves the door open without guaranteeing any precise timeline. ### An executive testing the limits of its room to maneuver This situation illustrates the tension between the president's desire to move quickly on this diplomatic file and the legal constraints imposed by Congress, a typical institutional balancing act in contemporary American foreign policy. *I note with interest that even a president as prone to unilateralism as Trump runs into a legal wall here that he cannot simply bypass with a stroke of the pen, which, for once, reassures me about the balance of powers.* ## International reactions to this possible reopening ### Visible caution on the European side Several European allies are watching this file with real caution, aware that unfreezing the F-35 sale to Turkey could reignite tensions with other Alliance members already critical of Ankara's past closeness to Moscow over the S-400 file. This caution also reflects NATO's difficulty in maintaining a coherent line on **sanctions** tied to buying Russian equipment, even as the Alliance demands unwavering firmness from every member on the Ukrainian file against Russia. ### Russia's position, lying in wait on this file Moscow is closely watching this possible military rapprochement between Washington and Ankara, aware that a full normalization of Turkish-American defense ties would mechanically reduce Russian **influence** over a partner it has long cultivated through the S-400 sale. *I consider every step that moves Turkey away from military dependence on Russia to be a clear win for Western cohesion, even if the road to get there remains littered with diplomatic pitfalls.* ## The economic stakes for America's defense industry ### A potential multibillion-dollar contract Beyond diplomacy, a potential sale of more than a hundred F-35s to Turkey would represent a multibillion-dollar contract for **Lockheed Martin** and its entire **supply chain**, a major **economic** stake for the American defense industry at a time when global demand for the jet remains strong. This economic dimension is never neutral in this kind of file: the more the American industry depends on international contracts, the stronger the political pressure to ease restrictions like those targeting Turkey becomes over the years. ### A global race for fifth-generation fighters The global **market** for fifth-generation fighters remains fiercely contested between the United States and its strategic rivals, reinforcing the argument that letting Turkey drift permanently toward Russian or Chinese alternatives would be a strategic setback for the West as a whole. *I think Washington has every economic and strategic interest in keeping Turkey within its military industrial fold rather than pushing it toward competing suppliers less concerned with Western alliances.* ## What this means for NATO's long-term unity ### A **test** of cohesion before anything else Just days before the Ankara summit, this F-35 file has become a genuine test of NATO's **capacity** to resolve its internal disputes without fracturing its cohesion against the external threats posed by **Russia**, **China**, **Iran** and **North Korea**. A positive resolution of this dispute would send a strong **signal** of Western diplomatic **maturity**, while another failure would prolong seven years of needless tension between two allies whose military cooperation remains strategically indispensable. ### A **precedent** for other cross-sanction files How this file is ultimately resolved could also set a precedent for other allies who have flirted with Russian equipment in the past, an issue that reaches far beyond the Turkish case alone within today's Western security architecture. *I will say it plainly: NATO needs to show it can resolve its own internal contradictions if it wants to keep its full credibility against adversaries watching for the slightest crack in its unity.* ## The symbolic weight of choosing Ankara as host city ### A political message aimed at Erdogan The choice of **Ankara** as host city for the **2026** NATO summit is no accident: it lets **Erdogan** project, to a domestic Turkish audience, the image of a head of state capable of drawing every leader of the Atlantic Alliance to his own country, a valuable political asset ahead of difficult electoral and economic milestones for Turkey. This diplomatic symbol strengthens Ankara's **negotiating** position on the **F-35** file, since any American **concession** announced during this summit would immediately be seen as a personal victory for the Turkish president in front of his own electorate. ### A precedent for future traveling summits This summit also sets a precedent for NATO, which increasingly chooses to hold its major gatherings in countries where sensitive bilateral files remain open, a strategy that can ease diplomatic compromise but also exposes the Alliance to accusations of pandering to its hosts. This dynamic illustrates modern summit diplomacy, where the chosen venue itself becomes a bargaining chip among allies, on par with official speeches or final communiqués. *I see real diplomatic skill on Rutte's part in choosing Ankara, but also a genuine risk that the Alliance appears to be giving ground purely to flatter its current host.* ## The weight of military lobbies in this file ### **Lockheed Martin**, a discreet but decisive player Behind the political statements, the manufacturer **Lockheed Martin** has spent years applying steady pressure in **Washington** to unlock the F-35 sale to Turkey, a market judged too lucrative to remain closed indefinitely over a persistent geopolitical dispute. This industrial influence, rarely discussed publicly, weighs heavily nonetheless in the internal deliberations of the American administration, where economic interests and **national security** imperatives constantly intertwine on this kind of strategic file. ### A difficult balance between commerce and security The **U.S. Congress** remains torn between wanting to support its national defense industry and the need to maintain a firm line toward countries that have flirted with Russian military equipment, a dilemma that partly explains this file's slow pace since 2019. This tension between commercial interests and security demands is not unique to the Turkish case, but it finds a particularly stark illustration here given the financial sums at stake for the American defense industry. *I remain convinced that the commercial interests of the American defense industry often weigh more heavily in these decisions than official statements care to admit, a factor it would be naive to ignore in this particular file.* ## Conclusion: a file hanging on the Ankara summit ### A decision that could come in the next few days Whether **July 7 and 8** will truly mark the end of seven years of gridlock, or whether Trump's statements will once again amount to intent without follow-through, remains to be seen. The legal framework imposed by Congress complicates any hasty announcement, but the diplomatic and economic pressure in favor of a thaw has never been stronger. ### A symbol of Western unity worth watching closely Whatever the outcome, this F-35 file will remain a valuable indicator of the Alliance's ability to turn persistent bilateral tensions into concrete solutions, at a moment when Western unity against its strategic adversaries has never seemed more necessary. **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 - Izvestia — the United States again wants to sell F-35 fighter jets to Turkey, July 1, 2026 - Forbes — what defense leaders will discuss at the 2026 NATO summit, July 1, 2026 ### Secondary sources - Haberler — Minister Fidan says the F-35 sales ban may be lifted - Punch — analysts say Trump's Turkey visit may unlock fighter jet deal - Reuters — aerospace and defense news - Wikipedia — 2026 Ankara NATO summit --- Source: Maxime Marquette, MadMax. When citing, name the author and link https://mad-max.co/en/article/les-f-35-pour-la-turquie-la-carte-que-trump-abat-avant-ankara