Turkey’s F-35 Wish List: A Bargaining Chip in Trump’s NATO Playbook

As President Trump begins his visit to Ankara, it’s clear that this year’s NATO summit has become a prime opportunity for him to flex his diplomatic muscles and reshape the alliance according to his preferences. Amidst strained relationships with traditional US allies and a renewed push for burden-sharing among NATO members, Turkey has emerged as an unexpected beneficiary of Trump’s leniency.

The news that Trump is considering allowing Turkey to re-enter the F-35 program, from which it was excluded in 2019 due to its use of Russian military technology, has sparked debate within Congress and beyond. This move appears to be part of a larger effort by Trump to strengthen ties with Erdoğan’s government, even as he continues to question the value of NATO and push for increased defense spending among member states.

Turkey’s position on the international stage is complex, marked by strained ties with some European countries and a contentious economic relationship with Russia. Yet, Trump has consistently demonstrated a willingness to overlook these issues in pursuit of his own foreign policy goals.

For Erdoğan, acquiring F-35s represents a significant victory, underscoring Turkey’s growing influence within NATO. The country’s acquisition of Russian defense systems in 2019 raised concerns among US officials and lawmakers, who argued that it compromised the integrity of the alliance. By reversing this decision, Trump is effectively rewarding Erdoğan for his efforts to strengthen ties with the United States.

Trump’s willingness to make concessions to Turkey suggests that he genuinely believes burden-sharing will be more effective in the presence of countries like Turkey, which has a history of pursuing its own interests at the expense of alliance cohesion. However, this move may also simply be another example of Trump’s willingness to make concessions to achieve short-term diplomatic gains.

By allowing Turkey to re-enter the F-35 program, Trump is using the country as a bargaining chip in his efforts to reshape NATO according to his preferences. This move reflects his ongoing push for increased defense spending among member states and his desire to shift the burden of conventional defense away from the United States.

Trump’s approach within NATO has been more confrontational than his predecessor, Barack Obama, who pushed for increased burden-sharing with nuance and subtlety. Trump often uses his meetings as opportunities to lecture allies about their defense spending habits, putting pressure on member states to meet their 5% defense spending targets.

The impact of this approach is evident in the current state of NATO, where some member states have made progress toward meeting their defense spending targets, while others continue to lag behind. The pressure on these countries will only intensify in the coming years as Trump continues to push for a more equitable distribution of defense responsibilities.

As the summit continues, it’s clear that Trump’s actions will have far-reaching consequences for NATO’s long-term viability. His willingness to make concessions to Turkey and other member states may ultimately compromise the integrity of the alliance, undermining efforts to promote burden-sharing and increase defense spending. The question remains: will Trump’s push for increased defense spending among member states be enough to sustain the alliance in a rapidly changing world? Or will his confrontational approach ultimately lead to its downfall?