Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and U.S. President Donald Trump recently had a phone conversation focused on resolving the long-standing uncertainty surrounding Turkey’s participation in the F-35 fighter jet program, which has cast a shadow over their NATO partnership.
Could Turkish arms aid to Ukraine reclaim Ankara's F-35 status
Photo credit: Lockheed Martin
This discussion, prompted by a series of diplomatic exchanges including Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan’s recent trip to Washington, sought to address Turkey’s exclusion from the program and explore avenues for reconciliation.
Though the precise timing of the call remains undisclosed, it builds on earlier outreach from Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff, who met with Erdogan to lay the groundwork for renewed dialogue.
At the heart of the conversation lies Turkey’s demand for either reinstatement into the F-35 initiative or compensation for its $1.4 billion investment, severed when the U.S. expelled Turkey over its purchase of Russia’s S-400 air defense system.
Sources close to Turkey’s Ministry of National Defense indicate that both leaders were willing to pursue technical talks, though no firm commitments have surfaced, leaving the next steps shrouded in ambiguity.
This latest exchange revives a saga that began years ago with Turkey’s ambitious role in the F-35 program. Launched in 1999 as a multinational effort led by Lockheed Martin, the Joint Strike Fighter project welcomed Turkey as an early partner, committing to buy 100 F-35A conventional takeoff-and-landing models.
Turkish industries, including Turkish Aerospace Industries [TAI] and Aselsan, played a significant part, manufacturing over 900 components such as fuselage sections and electronic displays. The partnership reached a milestone in June 2018 when the first Turkish F-35 rolled out in Fort Worth, Texas, celebrated with a handover ceremony attended by Turkish officials.
However, this momentum halted abruptly in July 2019 when the U.S. suspended Turkey’s participation following the delivery of the S-400 system from Russia. American officials, including then-Defense Secretary Mark Esper, argued that the Russian hardware could compromise the F-35’s stealth technology by collecting sensitive data, a risk deemed intolerable within NATO’s framework.
Within months, the Pentagon redirected Turkey’s six completed jets to the U.S. Air Force and ceased training Turkish pilots at Luke Air Force Base in Arizona, marking a decisive end to Ankara’s immediate F-35 prospects.
Turkey’s expulsion spurred a strategic pivot, most notably through the accelerated development of its indigenous KAAN fighter. Conceived under the TF-X initiative in 2016, KAAN emerged as a direct response to the F-35 fallout, aiming to modernize Turkey’s air force and assert technological independence.
Spearheaded by TAI with technical assistance from Britain’s BAE Systems, the twin-engine stealth fighter completed its inaugural flight last February, covering 13 minutes at 230 knots and reaching 8,000 feet.
Powered by General Electric F110 engines—already in use across Turkey’s F-16 fleet—KAAN features a sleek design with radar-evading contours and an internal weapons bay capable of carrying air-to-air and air-to-ground munitions.
Defense Minister Yaşar Güler has outlined an ambitious timeline, targeting the production of two jets per month by 2029, with a long-term goal of transitioning to a domestically engineered engine by TRMotor. Turkish officials tout KAAN as a symbol of national resilience, yet analysts remain skeptical of its readiness.
Aerospace expert Richard Aboulafia notes that while the prototype’s flight was a success, achieving full combat capability could take until the late 2030s, given the complexities of avionics integration and engine development.
Meanwhile, the global F-35 enterprise has marched forward without Turkey’s involvement. Lockheed Martin’s latest figures show over 990 jets delivered across the A, B, and C variants, serving the U.S. military and allies like South Korea, Canada, and the Netherlands.
Production centers in Fort Worth, Texas, churn out the majority, supplemented by facilities in Cameri, Italy, and Nagoya, Japan. Turkey’s six F-35As, bearing tail numbers 18-0001 through 18-0006, linger in the U.S., stored at bases including Luke in Arizona, Eglin in Florida, and Nellis in Nevada.
Initially delivered for pilot training, these jets were reassigned to the U.S. Air Force under a $862 million contract adjustment finalized in 2020, following a Senate vote two years earlier that blocked their transfer to Turkey.
Last year, a report from the Turkish newspaper Aydinlik revealed that the U.S. had billed Turkey $30 million for technical support of these aircraft since 2022, citing the need to maintain their advanced systems even in storage.
Pentagon spokesperson Lt. Col. Daniel Hernandez confirmed the figure in a February 2024 statement, noting that the costs cover software updates and airframe preservation, though Turkey has yet to pay, instead reiterating calls for reimbursement of its original investment.
Delving into the specifics of these Turkish F-35s illuminates what Ankara lost in the rift. Constructed to the Block 3F configuration, they boast full operational capability, with software supporting a suite of weaponry including the AIM-120 AMRAAM missile and GBU-31 Joint Direct Attack Munition.
Their Pratt & Whitney F135 engines deliver 43,000 pounds of thrust with an afterburner, enabling speeds above Mach 1.6 across a 1,200-mile combat radius. Stealth is a hallmark, achieved through a radar-absorbent coating and an airframe designed to deflect detection, complemented by the AN/APG-81 radar, which tracks targets at extended ranges.
The cockpit features a panoramic touchscreen and a helmet-mounted display that overlays flight and targeting data, offering pilots unparalleled awareness. These systems, tailored for NATO interoperability, would have linked seamlessly with allied networks, enhancing Turkey’s role in joint operations—a capability now sidelined as the jets serve American crews instead.
The Erdogan-Trump phone talk underscores a broader diplomatic chess game. Turkey’s S-400 purchase, finalized in 2019 despite U.S. warnings, stemmed from urgent security needs amid instability in Syria and Iraq, where missile threats loomed large.
With a range of up to 250 miles, the Russian system provided a robust defense layer, but its deployment triggered fears within NATO that Russia could exploit it to study Western technology. Efforts to bridge this divide have faltered: suggestions that Turkey store the S-400s under U.S. supervision at Incirlik Air Base met resistance from Ankara, which views the system as a sovereign asset.
During Fidan’s Washington visit, Acting Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland indicated that dismantling the S-400 could unlock Turkey’s F-35 return, a position Güler welcomed, suggesting that KAAN’s progress might nudge the U.S. toward compromise. “The Americans see we’re not standing still,” Güler told reporters, hinting at leverage gained from Turkey’s domestic strides.
The financial and strategic stakes are immense. Turkey’s exclusion stripped it of an estimated $9 billion in manufacturing revenue, as calculated by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, while the Pentagon faced the task of reassigning production roles to other partners.
Congressional sentiment, shaped by the National Defense Authorization Act, leans cautious, with figures like Senator Jeanne Shaheen voicing concerns over Turkey’s ties to Russia and its stance on Hamas. Yet voices like Kadir Ustun of the SETA Foundation argue that Turkey’s geographic position—straddling Europe and the Middle East—makes it indispensable, urging a pragmatic deal.
The $30 million maintenance bill adds another layer, with Turkey’s refusal to pay signaling deeper resentment over the initial $1.4 billion outlay, a sum it seeks returned in full should the jets remain stateside.
Historical parallels offer context. The U.S.-Turkey rift echoes Cold War-era tensions, such as the 1975 arms embargo after Turkey’s Cyprus intervention, resolved only through prolonged negotiation. Today’s impasse carries higher stakes, given NATO’s need for unity amid Russia’s assertiveness and Middle Eastern volatility.
KAAN’s emergence complicates the equation further, potentially reducing Turkey’s dependence on the F-35, though its timeline lags behind immediate operational needs. Aboulafia estimates that even with aggressive funding, KAAN won’t match the F-35’s maturity for at least 15 years, leaving Turkey reliant on aging F-16s and F-4s in the interim—a vulnerability Erdogan likely raised with Trump.
The phone conversation, hailed by Witkoff as a “transformational” moment, hints at personal chemistry that could tip the scales. Trump’s past praise for Erdogan, coupled with his administration’s deal-making ethos, contrasts with the Biden-era sanctions under CAATSA, imposed in December 2020 on Turkey’s defense sector.
Technical talks, expected soon, will test this dynamic, with Turkey pushing for either the jets’ delivery or a financial exit ramp. The U.S., meanwhile, must balance alliance cohesion with security imperatives, a tightrope complicated by domestic politics. Reintegrating Turkey would require reallocating production and overcoming congressional hurdles, a process Hernandez called “feasible but intricate” in his briefing.
As the dust settles, the six F-35s in U.S. storage embody the stakes. Maintained at taxpayer expense, their fate—whether flown by Turkish pilots, sold elsewhere, or kept in American hangars—awaits resolution.
Erdogan’s insistence on sovereignty clashes with NATO’s collective ethos, yet both sides see value in mending ties. Güler’s team remains hopeful, citing Trump’s openness as a window, while Nuland’s conditions signal a firm line. For now, the phone talk marks a tentative step, its outcome poised to redefine Turkey’s military trajectory and its place in the Western alliance.
***
Follow us everywhere and at any time. BulgarianMilitary.com has responsive design and you can open the page from any computer, mobile devices or web browsers. For more up-to-date news, follow our Google News, YouTube, Reddit, LinkedIn, and Twitter pages. Our standards: Manifesto & ethical principles.