Turkey’s Defense Dance: How America’s Strategic Rival Became Its Biggest Arms Customer

The White House’s September 25 meeting between Trump and Erdoğan reveals a paradox at the heart of U.S. foreign policy: Washington is arming a NATO ally that increasingly acts like a strategic competitor.

A Complicated Alliance

The U.S.-Turkey relationship has long defied simple categorization. As NATO’s second-largest military force and guardian of the alliance’s southeastern flank, Turkey remains indispensable to Western security architecture. Yet under President Erdoğan’s increasingly authoritarian rule, Ankara has charted an independent course that often conflicts with American interests—from purchasing Russian S-400 missile systems to threatening military operations against U.S.-backed Kurdish forces in Syria.

The timing of this high-profile meeting is particularly significant. Turkey was expelled from the F-35 program in 2019 after acquiring the Russian S-400 system, a move that cost Turkish defense contractors billions and deprived the Turkish Air Force of next-generation capabilities. Now, discussions of F-35s alongside F-16 deals suggest a potential thaw in defense relations, even as fundamental disagreements persist.

The Arms Trade Calculus

The reported Boeing aircraft purchase and F-16 modernization package represent more than routine defense transactions. For Turkey, these deals are essential to maintaining air superiority in an increasingly volatile region, especially as its aging F-16 fleet faces growing maintenance challenges. The potential value of these combined deals could exceed $20 billion, making Turkey one of America’s most lucrative defense customers despite the political tensions.

For the United States, these sales serve multiple strategic purposes. They bind Turkey closer to Western defense ecosystems, making a complete pivot to Russian or Chinese alternatives more difficult. They also generate significant revenue for American defense contractors and support thousands of U.S. manufacturing jobs—a consideration that has influenced administration policy across party lines.

Beyond the Hardware

The deeper implications of this meeting extend well beyond defense procurement. Erdoğan’s visit comes as Turkey plays an increasingly assertive role in multiple regional conflicts, from Libya to the South Caucasus. By dangling advanced weaponry, Washington hopes to influence Turkish behavior on issues ranging from NATO expansion (Turkey continues to block Sweden’s membership) to sanctions enforcement against Russia.

Yet this transactional approach carries risks. Each arms sale to Turkey potentially enables actions that contradict U.S. interests, whether it’s strikes against Kurdish partners or aggressive moves in the Eastern Mediterranean that alarm Greece and Cyprus. The administration must balance the immediate benefits of defense cooperation against the longer-term costs of empowering an unpredictable partner.

As Trump and Erdoğan shake hands in the Oval Office, they will embody a question that haunts American foreign policy: In an era of great power competition, can the United States afford to punish problematic allies—or must it hold them close, whatever the cost to its stated values and regional partnerships?