The debate over a possible US sale of F-35 stealth fighter jets to Türkiye has exposed one of the most significant geopolitical fault lines in the Middle East. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has openly warned that providing Türkiye with advanced American fighter aircraft could “destroy the balance of power” in the region, reflecting Israel’s growing concern that Ankara is emerging as its most capable strategic competitor. These concerns intensified after US President Donald Trump signaled openness to lifting defense sanctions on Türkiye and reconsidering Ankara’s participation in the F-35 program.
The disagreement is no longer simply about military hardware. It represents a broader struggle over regional leadership, military superiority, and the future political order of the Middle East. As Türkiye expands its defense industry, projects influence across neighboring regions, and adopts a more assertive foreign policy, Israel increasingly sees Ankara as a long-term strategic challenge rather than merely a diplomatic rival.
Israel’s Longstanding Strategy: Maintaining Military Superiority
For decades, Israel has relied on maintaining a qualitative military edge over every other military power in the Middle East. This principle has shaped American defense policy, leading Washington to ensure that Israel possesses more advanced military technology than its regional neighbors.
The F-35 stealth fighter represents one of the world’s most sophisticated combat aircraft, capable of penetrating advanced air-defense systems while carrying out precision strikes with reduced radar detection. Israel already operates a customized version of the aircraft and has integrated it deeply into its national defense strategy.
Netanyahu argues that allowing Türkiye to acquire the same aircraft would narrow Israel’s technological advantage and reduce its freedom to conduct military operations throughout the region. His public opposition reflects concerns that Israel’s long-held air superiority could gradually erode if another major regional military acquires comparable capabilities.
Türkiye’s Expanding Regional Influence
Israel’s concerns extend beyond fighter aircraft.
Over the past decade, Türkiye has significantly expanded its geopolitical influence through military operations, diplomacy, defense exports, and regional partnerships. Turkish forces maintain a military presence in northern Syria and Iraq while Ankara has strengthened defense cooperation with countries across Africa, Central Asia, and the Caucasus.
Türkiye has also invested heavily in its indigenous defense industry, producing advanced drones, naval vessels, armored vehicles, and missile systems that have gained international recognition. This growing defense capability has reduced Ankara’s dependence on Western suppliers while increasing its strategic autonomy.
Unlike many regional powers that rely primarily on imported military equipment, Türkiye is increasingly becoming a defense exporter capable of sustaining long-term military modernization.
The Political Divide Between Ankara and Tel Aviv
Military capability alone does not explain Israel’s concerns.
Relations between Türkiye and Israel have deteriorated sharply over the past several years due to deep political disagreements. President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has repeatedly criticized Israeli military operations in Gaza and has accused Israel of violating international humanitarian law. Turkish officials have also strengthened diplomatic engagement with the Palestinian leadership and frequently advocate for greater international pressure on Israel.
From Israel’s perspective, Türkiye’s increasingly vocal criticism has transformed bilateral disagreements into a broader geopolitical rivalry.
Israeli officials argue that Ankara is attempting to position itself as a leading political voice across the Muslim world, challenging Israel’s diplomatic standing while competing for influence in regional affairs.
Competition for Leadership in the New Middle East
The Middle East is undergoing a significant redistribution of power.
Traditional regional actors are redefining their alliances, while conflicts involving Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, and the Eastern Mediterranean continue reshaping regional security.
Within this changing environment, both Israel and Türkiye seek to influence the future regional order—but often from opposing political perspectives.
Israel emphasizes security cooperation with Western allies and normalization agreements with Arab states.
Türkiye seeks greater strategic independence, deeper engagement with Muslim-majority countries, and an expanded diplomatic role in resolving regional conflicts.
These competing visions naturally generate friction even without direct military confrontation.
The Eastern Mediterranean Adds Another Layer of Rivalry
Energy politics have become another source of strategic competition.
Israel has expanded natural gas production from offshore fields in the Eastern Mediterranean and has pursued energy partnerships with Greece and Cyprus.
Türkiye disputes several maritime boundaries in the region and seeks a larger role in Eastern Mediterranean energy development.
The resulting disagreements involve not only access to energy resources but also future export routes, naval influence, and economic partnerships.
Consequently, military modernization and naval expansion have become increasingly important components of both countries’ long-term strategies.
Why the F-35 Debate Matters Beyond Military Technology
The controversy surrounding the proposed F-35 sale reflects broader geopolitical calculations.
For Washington, restoring defense cooperation with Türkiye could strengthen NATO cohesion and reinforce Türkiye’s role as a strategically important ally at a time of growing instability in Europe and the Middle East. President Trump has indicated a willingness to revisit restrictions imposed after Türkiye’s purchase of the Russian S-400 air-defense system, although legal and congressional obstacles remain.
For Israel, however, the issue extends beyond NATO politics.
Israeli policymakers fear that any reduction in their qualitative military advantage could alter regional deterrence and complicate future security planning.
This difference in strategic priorities explains why the proposed sale has generated unusually strong opposition from Israeli leadership.
Does Israel View Türkiye as an Immediate Military Threat?
At present, there is no evidence that Israel and Türkiye are preparing for direct military conflict.
Both countries maintain important economic relationships, remain connected to Western institutions in different ways, and have reasons to avoid open confrontation.
However, Israel increasingly appears to view Türkiye as a long-term strategic competitor capable of reshaping regional power dynamics through military modernization, diplomatic influence, and independent foreign policy.
That assessment differs from viewing Türkiye as an imminent military adversary, but it still influences Israeli defense planning and diplomatic engagement.
The Future of the Israel-Türkiye Rivalry
The trajectory of relations between Israel and Türkiye will depend on several interconnected developments: US decisions regarding advanced arms transfers, NATO cooperation, regional conflicts, energy competition in the Eastern Mediterranean, and the broader security environment following recent tensions involving Iran.
If Washington ultimately approves advanced defense sales to Türkiye while maintaining security guarantees to Israel, it may seek to balance the interests of both partners. Whether such a balance proves sustainable will depend on broader regional developments rather than on a single weapons deal.
Middle Eastern geopolitics
Israel’s concerns about Türkiye are rooted in a combination of military, political, and strategic factors. The debate over F-35 fighter jets symbolizes a broader transformation in Middle Eastern geopolitics, where Ankara’s expanding defense capabilities and regional influence intersect with Israel’s longstanding objective of preserving its qualitative military edge.
Although the current dispute is centered on advanced aircraft, the underlying competition reflects a wider contest over regional influence, security architecture, and leadership. How Washington manages its relationships with both allies may shape not only bilateral ties but also the future balance of power across the Middle East.
