Key facts
- US lawmakers are seeking to maintain legal obstacles to Turkey's re-entry into the F-35 program.
- A letter signed by 18 members of Congress urges the House leadership to uphold current US law.
- Turkey's removal from the F-35 program in 2019 was linked to its acquisition of Russian S-400 systems.
- US law requires the removal of S-400 systems for Turkey to rejoin the F-35 program.
- Concerns exist about the potential for S-400 systems to compromise F-35 technology.
The potential for Turkey to rejoin the F-35 fighter jet program has sparked a debate in Washington, with a coalition of Greek-American lobbyists and members of Congress working to maintain existing legal barriers. This issue resurfaced following a meeting between US President Donald Trump and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, though no official decision on Turkey's re-entry has been made.
While Athens acknowledges the sovereign right of nations to make armament decisions, it emphasizes its right and obligation to raise critical regional security issues with allies. Officials in Athens highlight ongoing tensions with Turkey, including a 1995 justification for war and disputes in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean, calling for safeguards against advanced weapons sales being used against NATO members.
The debate has largely shifted to Congress, where supporters of the restrictions point to Turkey's 2019 removal from the F-35 program, directly linked to its acquisition of Russian S-400 missile systems. Democratic Congresswoman Dina Titus has spearheaded an organized reaction, gathering 18 signatures on a letter to the House leadership urging them to be prepared to intervene if the administration moves to allow Turkey's return.
According to Thanos Davelis, Director of Public Affairs at the Hellenic American Leadership Council (HALC), this letter represents the first organized congressional response. He notes that while many Republicans are also cautious, they prefer a more discreet approach, working internally to persuade the Trump administration. The primary legal argument against Turkey's return centers on the CAATSA law and specific provisions in US defense budgets, which mandate the removal of the S-400s as a condition for re-entry into the F-35 program.
A key point of contention is the interpretation of "possession" under US law, with discussions around scenarios involving the removal of the S-400s from Turkish control or their transfer to a third country. Beyond legalities, a significant concern for the US is protecting F-35 technology, fearing that the co-location of S-400 systems could allow Russia to gather sensitive data on the aircraft's stealth capabilities and operational systems. This technological risk was the primary driver for Turkey's exclusion in 2019.
The lobbying efforts extend beyond Greek-Americans, involving other groups like bodies representing the American-Jewish community. HALC continues its engagement with members of Congress and government officials. The ultimate outcome is expected to hinge on the balance between the White House's desire for improved relations with Ankara and Congress's firm legislative stance on the S-400 issue.