For decades, the United States has been a key partner in bolstering Turkey’s military capabilities and integrating it into NATO structures. This investment, dating back to the Cold War, continues today with ongoing U.S. aid and support.

A History of U.S. Support for Turkey

Throughout its alliance with the U.S., Turkey has consistently benefited from substantial support. This includes critical intelligence and operational assistance in its fight against the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). In 1999, U.S. intelligence aided in the capture of PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan.

More recently, the Trump administration dismissed a lawsuit against a Turkish public bank involving violations of U.S. sanctions against Iran, further demonstrating support for Ankara. As conflict escalates in the region, Turkey stands to gain from a potential weakening of Iran.

Turkey's Current Stance and Requests

Despite receiving significant aid, Turkey has been hesitant to fully align its policies with those of its allies. While Syria has expressed willingness to support U.S. efforts against Tehran, Turkey remains largely absent from these initiatives.

Demanding Reciprocity

Turkey continues to request access to engines and technology for its KAAN fighter program. These requests, while not unreasonable on their own, highlight the need for a more balanced relationship within the alliance. Alliances require mutual contributions to shared security objectives.

Potential Contributions and Current Concerns

Turkey possesses significant military assets that could be valuable to allied operations. Its navy is one of the largest in NATO and could assist in enforcing freedom of navigation in the Persian Gulf. Furthermore, its mine-clearing capabilities and intelligence assets could prove vital in monitoring Iranian activities.

However, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has instead focused on criticizing Israel and warning of broader conflict. This posture, coupled with Turkey’s tolerance of networks linked to Iranian-backed groups like Hamas, raises concerns about Ankara’s ultimate priorities.

The Need for a Reciprocal Alliance

The call for greater burden-sharing within NATO is not punitive, but rather a necessary step to restore credibility to the alliance. NATO’s strength relies on the principle of mutual obligation – security guarantees matched by meaningful contributions.

Washington should clearly communicate that future defense cooperation, including advanced aircraft sales and technology transfers, will be contingent on Turkey demonstrating reciprocity. Turkey doesn’t need to lead the charge against Iran, but it cannot remain passive while continuing to expect the benefits of NATO membership.