A statement with legal and strategic weight echoed today in the hearing room of the US House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee . Secretary of State Marco Rubio , testifying before the committee, explicitly acknowledged that US law leaves the Trump administration no room to reconsider Turkey ’s inclusion in the F-35 program, at least as long as Ankara continues to possess the Russian S-400 system . The statement comes in response to months of circulating re-inclusion scenarios and is the clearest position the head of US diplomacy has expressed on the issue.
The question came from Democratic Rep. Dina Titus , who asked Rubio to address statements by U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Tom Barak that had left open the possibility of reconsidering Turkey’s participation in the program. Rubio’s response was clear: “We do not have that option at this time, because the issue is regulated by legislative provisions. Both by the provisions that have been included in the defense budget bill (NDAA) and by other provisions of American legislation,” explicitly referring to the CAATSA law.
This legislative package is not a recent creation — rather, it has been built up over a long period of conflict. Turkey was removed from the F-35 consortium in July 2019 , after purchasing the Russian S-400 system. The decision was based on a specific fear: that the simultaneous operation of the S-400 and the F-35 could allow Russian intelligence to gain access to sensitive data on the stealth capabilities of the American fighter. That is, to reveal the “blind spots” of the most advanced Western aircraft to the Russians without a fight. On this basis, the first Trump administration imposed sanctions on the Turkish defense contractor SSIK in December 2020.
Congress then moved to enact the embargo in a way that makes reinstatement legally prohibitive absent specific steps. Section 1245 of the FY 2020 NDAA prohibits the Department of Defense from transferring F-35s to Turkey unless Ankara no longer possesses the S-400, has made a credible commitment not to acquire such systems in the future, and has not accepted other Russian defense systems since July 2019. These conditions are mandatory , not discretionary, and the Secretaries of State and Defense must submit written certification to Congress at least 90 days before any transfer action.
This framework had not prevented speculation. Turkish President Erdogan had stated at the NATO summit last year that “technical level talks have begun” with the US on the F-35. Ambassador Tom Barak had in turn made statements that implied an open stance on Washington. In August 2025, forty Democratic congressmen signed a letter asking for clarification from Rubio, expressing concern about a possible change in US policy. while in September 2025 a new joint letter from congressmen insisted that the execution of any agreement without fulfilling the legislative conditions would “ violate US law ”. Today, Rubio, with his statement, essentially confirmed that the government recognizes the binding force of this legislation.
The significance of this statement is not limited to US-Turkish relations. In the Eastern Mediterranean, the possibility of Turkey’s return to the F-35 program is being watched with particular sensitivity, and more so by Greece , which currently operates F-35s as a member of the program . The simultaneous inclusion of Turkey and Greece in a program based on shared technological confidentiality is not self-evident, and the balance of power in the Aegean airspace is one of the most sensitive issues of regional security. In the past, letters from members of Congress to Congress have explicitly expressed concern about the implications for the Eastern Mediterranean zone given Turkey’s stance.
The key remains the same as it has always been, namely the Russian S-400 missiles. Turkey has shown no inclination to get rid of the system — it has invested politically and defensively in its possession, and any action in that direction would constitute an extremely difficult domestic decision. Without this step, Rubio today put things in their place: the American executive branch simply does not have the legal ability to act differently. This is not a political choice of the Trump administration, but a law that binds both the executive and legislative branches, unless Congress decides to change it.
