During this week’s NATO summit in Ankara, U.S. President Donald Trump signaled his intent to resume sales of the advanced F-35 fighter jet to Turkey, which have been blocked by the U.S. for years.
Israel has been closely watching the possibility that the United States could return Turkey to the F-35 program, viewing the issue as one that extends far beyond defense procurement and into the broader balance of power in the Middle East.
For Israel, Turkey’s readmission to the F-35, a move would signal a significant shift in Washington’s policy toward Ankara. It would also touch on one of the country’s core security priorities: maintaining Israel’s qualitative military edge in the region.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu underscored those concerns in an interview with CNN, warning that selling F-35 fighter jets to Turkey would “destroy the balance of power in the Middle East.” He argued that Turkey “is not a model U.S. ally,” citing Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s policies and Ankara’s ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.
Israel’s Channel 12 also reported that Israel’s ambassador to the United States, Yechiel Leiter, has expressed clear opposition to Turkey’s return to the program.
In an interview with MBN, Gallia Lindenstrauss, a senior researcher at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), said Israel’s position has evolved over the years.
She noted that Israel did not initially oppose Turkey’s participation in the F-35 program. Ankara was an original partner in the project at a time when relations between the two countries were markedly different.
As bilateral ties deteriorated, Israel quietly opposed the sale of the aircraft to Turkey. That position has since become an openly declared policy at the highest political levels, reflected in Netanyahu’s recent remarks.
Even so, Turkey’s return to the program remains far from certain. Any move would still require congressional approval and would depend on resolving the issue of Turkey’s Russian-made S-400 air defense system – the primary reason Ankara was removed from the F-35 program in 2019.
Three Strategic Concerns
Lindenstrauss said Israeli objections rest on three main considerations.
The first is preserving Israel’s air superiority. “The air force is one of Israel’s most important military assets,” she said. “Israel therefore seeks to maintain its qualitative advantage in this domain.”
The second involves Turkey’s growing military capabilities. Turkey already possesses substantial land and naval forces, Lindenstrauss said, and acquiring advanced air capabilities through the F-35 would “add a new dimension to its military power,” a development that concerns Israel.
The third extends beyond the aircraft themselves to what the deal could signal about U.S. regional policy. According to Lindenstrauss, bringing Turkey back into the program could pave the way for additional advanced U.S. arms sales to Ankara. Israel is watching that possibility closely, particularly in the security environment that has emerged since the Oct. 7 attacks.
Opposition Across Israel’s Political Spectrum
Concern over the potential sale has also been voiced by Israel’s opposition.
Benny Gantz, a former defense minister and former Israel Defense Forces chief of staff who heads the Blue and White party, said Israel should focus on ensuring its military superiority rather than simply trying to block the deal.
“The Americans cannot be prevented from selling fighter aircraft,” Gantz said in a statement. “But our security superiority can be guaranteed.”
He revealed that after the announcement of the Abraham Accords in 2020, when the United States was considering selling F-35s to the United Arab Emirates, he traveled to Washington and signed an agreement with then-U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper – with Trump’s personal approval – to preserve Israel’s qualitative air superiority even if the aircraft were sold to other countries.
Gantz called for that agreement to remain in force, urged deeper security cooperation with the United States, and advocated preventing Turkey from acquiring military capabilities that could threaten Israel or its regional partners. He also warned that such a move could trigger a regional arms race.
Despite these concerns, Lindenstrauss does not believe Israel and Turkey are headed toward direct military confrontation in the near term.
She said Syria remains the most sensitive point of friction between the two countries, but noted that Israel and Turkey have established a deconfliction mechanism aimed at preventing military incidents.
Current indicators, she said, suggest that both sides are seeking to avoid direct escalation for now.
Although Washington has yet to make a final decision, the debate in Israel has already expanded beyond the question of the F-35 itself. It has become part of a broader discussion about the future of U.S.-Turkish relations and whether a shift in that relationship could force Israel to reassess its security and strategic calculations across the region.
