Ankara’s Defensive Rise: A New NATO Path?

Turkey’s rise as a defence-industrial power is no longer a peripheral subplot in NATO politics. It has become a structural development with implications for how the alliance equips itself, how regional powers diversify procurement, and how strategic influence is exercised between Europe, the United States, and the Middle East. While much of the public discussion around NATO still revolves around burden-sharing targets and the Russian threat, a more consequential transformation is unfolding in parallel: Turkey is building a defence-industrial corridor that links alliance demand, regional export markets, and domestic technological ambition.

The timing gives this argument unusual weight. Turkey is set to host NATO leaders in Ankara on 7–8 July 2026, a moment that places its political role and industrial trajectory under the same spotlight. That summit matters not simply because it will convene alliance leaders in the Turkish capital, but because it comes after a period in which Turkey’s defence sector has expanded in scale, deepened in sophistication, and broadened its customer base across Europe, the Gulf, Africa, and Asia.

What emerges from this trajectory is not a Turkish substitute for NATO, nor a coherent anti-Western bloc inside the alliance. It is something more complex and, in strategic terms, more significant: an alternative source of military capability inside NATO that others can increasingly use when Washington or Brussels appear too slow, too restrictive, or too politically encumbered. In that sense, Ankara is not building a rival alliance. It is building an alternative industrial lane within the existing one.

The clearest way to understand Turkey’s changing role is to start with the numbers. According to detailed industry reporting, Turkish defence and aerospace exports reached $7.2 billion in 2024 and then climbed to roughly $10.1 billion in 2025, crossing the $10 billion threshold for the first time and posting annual growth of about 48.8%. However, export revenues had stood at only $248 million in the early 2000s, illustrating the scale of the transformation over two decades.

The industrial base behind that export performance has grown just as dramatically. In 2002, the sector reportedly consisted of 56 companies and 62 projects, with foreign dependency near 80%; by 2025–2026, it had expanded to more than 3,500 companies, over 1,400 projects, and a local content rate reported at 82–84%. Sector turnover rose from $1.1 billion in 2002 to $20.2 billion by the end of 2024, while direct employment approached 100,000 people. These figures do not merely indicate growth in output. They suggest the emergence of a broad ecosystem with design, manufacturing, maintenance, software, and subsystem capacities increasingly rooted inside Turkey itself.

The geographic pattern of exports is equally revealing. Turkish officials stated that about $5.6 billion, or 56% of 2025 defence exports, went to the European Union, NATO countries, and the United States, while Europe alone accounted for $4.3 billion and the Middle East for $1.6 billion. The industry was exporting to 185 countries across 230 product categories by early 2026. This is what makes the Turkish case distinct from that of a conventional regional arms supplier. It is not simply selling to the Global South or serving a narrow political clientele. It is operating simultaneously within NATO markets and beyond them, binding alliance-compatible production to non-alliance demand.

There is also a qualitative change behind the numbers. Turkish reporting emphasises that many of these exports are NATO-standard and cost-effective, a pairing that is strategically important because it places Turkish firms in the space between expensive Western high-end systems and lower-cost but politically riskier non-Western alternatives. That middle position helps explain why Ankara is increasingly relevant to states seeking speed, affordability, and some degree of strategic flexibility.

If the export data provide the material foundation of Turkey’s defence-industrial rise, the KAAN fighter programme supplies its political symbol. KAAN is not merely another weapons platform. It is the clearest expression of Turkey’s determination to avoid again being trapped by the vulnerabilities exposed through its exclusion from the F-35 programme. The programme therefore carries a significance that goes well beyond the future composition of the Turkish Air Force. It embodies a project of strategic independence in one of the most technologically demanding sectors of modern warfare.

Breaking Defense reported in June 2025 that KAAN’s early flight tests began with a demonstrator in 2024 using General Electric’s F110 engine, while Turkish Aerospace Industries set out a path toward a domestically produced TF35000 turbofan with early testing in 2026 and possible integration beginning in 2032. The programme is expected to involve six aircraft in the test campaign and thousands of hours of flight testing. TAI’s leadership also stated that the first non-demonstrator aircraft would begin flying in 2026 and that the aircraft was targeted to enter service with the Turkish Air Force in 2028.

Those timelines matter because they show that KAAN is no longer a purely aspirational prestige project. It has become a structured attempt to build a fifth-generation fighter family that can anchor domestic advances in avionics, sensors, flight controls, propulsion, and weapons integration. Just as important, the programme is already tied to export ambition. According to Breaking Defence, Turkish Aerospace expected to finalise a first international sale to Indonesia for 48 aircraft while also anticipating another comparably large deal soon after. Separate Turkish reporting likewise identified the Indonesian KAAN deal as one of the landmark contracts of 2025.

The strategic significance of KAAN lies not only in whether it eventually rivals the F-35 in technical terms. Its deeper importance is that it creates an industrial and political centre of gravity outside the established American-led ecosystem for advanced combat aviation. For countries that seek access to high-end airpower but remain wary of US restrictions, congressional politics, or long delivery cycles, KAAN could become attractive precisely because it is a NATO-linked platform that does not sit fully inside the traditional US gatekeeping structure.

KAAN, however, would not matter nearly as much if it stood alone. What gives the Turkish model its wider significance is that the fighter sits atop an already expanding ecosystem of drones, electronic warfare systems, missiles, naval platforms, land systems, and technology-transfer arrangements. This is where the Turkish story becomes especially important for NATO. Ankara is no longer exporting isolated pieces of equipment; it is increasingly offering integrated capability stacks.

The unmanned systems domain is central to this shift. Turkish industry reporting states that Turkey has become the manufacturer of two out of every three military unmanned aerial vehicles sold worldwide. Even allowing for the promotional tone of that claim, there is little doubt that Turkish drones have become one of the country’s most influential defence exports, both militarily and diplomatically. The ecosystem around these platforms now includes payloads, targeting systems, electronic warfare pods, loitering munitions, and battle-management software tailored to customer requirements.

The same pattern extends into missiles and electronic warfare. Turkish sources highlighted new contracts for radar electronic attack and support pods for Polish-operated Bayraktar TB2s; Mode-5 identification systems supplied under a NATO Support and Procurement Agency framework; and export contracts for communications systems and unmanned surface vehicle payloads in the Asia-Pacific region. Domestic progress in long-range air-to-air missiles, cruise missiles, ballistic systems, and layered air-defence components further suggests that Turkey is trying to create not simply a catalogue of platforms but an increasingly self-reinforcing weapons architecture.

Naval and land capabilities reinforce the same point. The sale of two İSTİF-class frigates to Indonesia, auxiliary replenishment ships to Portugal, and an offshore patrol vessel contract with Romania show that Turkish shipbuilding now reaches well beyond coastal patrol craft or niche exports. On land, Turkish armoured vehicles, artillery, and integrated vehicle-based systems continue to widen Ankara’s relevance as a supplier of complete operational packages rather than one-off systems.

What makes this ecosystem particularly consequential is Turkey’s willingness to pair exports with production, assembly, maintenance, and technology-transfer arrangements abroad. The Indonesian drone deal, for example, included plans for a joint venture focused on production, assembly, and maintenance. That model gives Ankara a different value proposition from many traditional Western suppliers. It sells not only weapons but also a pathway, however partial, toward local industrial participation.

The regional fallout from the conflict has generated an immediate commercial and strategic shift, particularly concerning Gulf security requirements. As massed drone and missile attacks expose critical vulnerabilities in regional infrastructure, there has been a pronounced surge in demand for short-range air defense and directed-energy counter-drone technologies. Gulf states are increasingly prioritising cost-effective, rapidly deployable systems capable of intercepting asymmetric threats that traditional, high-tier defense architectures struggle to manage efficiently.

This shifting threat matrix accelerates a broader strategic imperative among Gulf governments to diversify their defense portfolios. While the conflict reinforces that the United States remains the indispensable guarantor of overarching regional security, it simultaneously highlights the risks of absolute dependence on a single umbrella. In seeking to hedge against supply disruptions and geopolitical fluctuations, these states are actively looking for alternatives. Türkiye occupies a uniquely favourable niche in this environment: as a NATO member with operationally proven hardware, it offers sophisticated, interoperable systems without carrying the severe political liabilities associated with procuring equipment from rival global powers.

The Turkish defense industrial model is structurally well-suited to capitalise on this specific regional demand. Unlike the slower procurement cycles typical of major Western defense contractors, the Turkish approach emphasises affordability, rapid production, and agility in high-tempo conflict scenarios. Furthermore, this model aligns seamlessly with the Gulf’s evolving strategic priorities, which now favour procurement packages that bundle hardware with technology transfer and localised manufacturing. By demonstrating a willingness to establish domestic production lines within the Gulf, Türkiye addresses the growing regional desire for sovereign resilience against global supply-chain shocks.

However, this elevated strategic role is not without substantial material limitations. The very surge in demand that boosts Türkiye’s market position simultaneously risks generating severe production bottlenecks and delivery delays, particularly if multiple regional actors move to procure overlapping systems at the same time. The pressures of a heightened conflict environment inevitably strain logistics. Additionally, because higher-end Turkish platforms still rely on imported subsystems and external components, a protracted regional war could significantly complicate manufacturing schedules, exposing the vulnerabilities within its own defence-industrial base.

Consequently, Türkiye’s integration into the region’s defense architecture operates on a strictly layered basis rather than as a total paradigm shift. It is highly unlikely to replace traditional Western partners in the realm of high-end strategic air and missile defense in the foreseeable future. Instead, its strategic value is concentrated in its capacity to act as a responsive, flexible supplier of niche capabilities—specifically unmanned systems, electronic warfare, and short-range interceptors. The conflict has ultimately deepened Türkiye’s role as an industrial bridge, providing Gulf states with an effective, politically viable avenue to acquire critical military assets during periods of acute regional instability.

The political significance of this rise is clearest when placed against the backdrop of the F-35 fallout, Western export controls, and the changing strategic preferences of Gulf states. Turkey’s removal from the F-35 programme after acquiring the Russian S-400 was a defining lesson for Ankara: dependence on Western technology comes with real political vulnerability. Much of the subsequent drive toward localisation, especially in engines and key subsystems, has been an attempt to narrow that vulnerability rather than simply to maximise prestige.

At the same time, Gulf states and other middle powers have been reassessing how much they wish to rely exclusively on the United States and Europe for military technology. Turkish systems benefit from that environment. They are generally more politically accessible than many advanced Western systems, yet more alliance-compatible than Russian or Chinese alternatives. This positioning helps explain why Ankara increasingly functions as a bridge between NATO’s industrial world and the procurement preferences of the broader Middle East.

That is why the Ankara summit on 7–8 July 2026 matters beyond symbolism. It will bring NATO leaders to a capital that is no longer merely asking for allied protection or lobbying for procurement approvals. It is increasingly offering the alliance and its partners another source of supply, another route for industrial cooperation, and another centre of technological ambition. The political effect is not to dissolve NATO’s existing hierarchy but to complicate it. A Turkey that can arm allies, partners, and non-aligned states at scale gains leverage not only through diplomacy but also through production.

To sum up, the most underrated transformation inside NATO today is not simply the rise in military spending or the return of large-scale deterrence in Europe. It is the emergence of Turkey as an industrial power capable of linking alliance demand with regional markets and strategic hedging. Over the past two decades, Turkey has moved from heavy external dependence toward a diversified defence economy with more than 3,500 companies, around 100,000 direct employees, exports above $10 billion, and an expanding portfolio of drones, missiles, naval platforms, electronic warfare systems, and advanced aircraft programmes.

This does not make Turkey a rival to NATO, and it does not make Ankara immune to Western constraints. KAAN still depends for now on an American engine, and many Turkish systems remain embedded in wider Western supply chains. But that is precisely why the story matters. Turkey is not leaving the alliance’s industrial ecosystem; it is carving out a parallel lane within it.

When NATO meets in Ankara, the most important development may not be found in the communiqué. It may be visible instead in the industrial architecture Turkey has quietly assembled an alliance member that has become a defence corridor between Europe, the United States, and the Middle East and that now offers others a military option when the traditional centres of Western power appear too slow, too restrictive, or too political.

Defence Turkey. “General Assessment of the Turkish Defense and Aerospace Industry in 2025 and Targets for 2026.” Defence Turkey. Defence Turkey, 2025. https://defenceturkey.com/news/general-assessment-of-the-turkish-defense-and-aerospace-industry-in-2025-and-targets-for-2026.

Daily Sabah. “Turkish Defense Exports Jump over 44% to Seal New January Record.” Daily Sabah. Daily Sabah, 2025. https://www.dailysabah.com/business/defense/turkish-defense-exports-jump-over-44-to-seal-new-january-record.

Yeni Şafak. “Turkish Defense and Aerospace Exports Hit Record $8.5 Billion.” Yeni Şafak. Yeni Şafak, 2025. https://en.yenisafak.com/turkiye/turkish-defense-and-aerospace-exports-hit-record-85-3712051.

Al Jazeera. “Here’s a Look at Türkiye’s Booming Defence Industry.” Al Jazeera. Al Jazeera Media Network, March 17, 2025. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/3/17/heres-a-look-at-turkiyes-booming-defence-industry.

Saratoga Foundation. “How Türkiye’s Defense Industry Is Reshaping Regional Security.” Saratoga Foundation. Saratoga Foundation, 2025. https://www.saratoga-foundation.org/p/how-turkiyes-defense-industry-is.

MEXC. “MEXC Lists Turkish Defense Industry Token.” MEXC News. MEXC, 2025. https://www.mexc.com/en-PH/news/1002150.

Aviation News Europe. “Turkey Orders Sixth Prototype of KAAN Fifth‑Generation Fighter Jet.” AviationNews.eu. Aviation News Europe, July 2025. https://aviationnews.eu/news/2025/07/turkey-orders-sixth-prototype-of-kaan-fifth%E2%80%91generation-fighter-jet/.

Anadolu Agency. “Türkiye’s National Combat Aircraft KAAN Gains Recognition in Chinese Military Media.” Anadolu Agency. Anadolu Agency, 2024. https://www.aa.com.tr/en/asia-pacific/turkiyes-national-combat-aircraft-kaan-gains-recognition-in-chinese-military-media/3312442.

Breaking Defense. “Turkish Aerospace Eyes Full Development of Local KAAN Fighter Jet Engine by 2032.” Breaking Defense. Breaking Media, June 2025. https://breakingdefense.com/2025/06/turkish-aerospace-eyes-full-development-of-local-kaan-fighter-jet-engine-by-2032/.

Breaking Defense. “Turkey’s Defense Industry Is Leaning into Autonomy and Targeting Gulf Markets.” Breaking Defense. Breaking Media, May 2026. https://breakingdefense.com/2026/05/turkeys-defense-industry-is-leaning-into-autonomy-and-targeting-gulf-markets/.

Military Machine. “Turkey’s KAAN Stealth Fighter and NATO.” Military Machine. MilitaryMachine.com, 2024. https://militarymachine.com/turkey-kaan-stealth-fighter-nato.

A News. “Türkiye’s KAAN Jet: Strategic Symbol and Defense Industry Jewel.” ANews.com.tr. A News, 2024. https://www.anews.com.tr/gallery/turkey/turkiyes-kaan-jet-strategic-symbol-and-defense-industry-jewel.

Aero News Journal. “KAAN Fifth-Generation Fighter Boosts Turkey’s Airpower.” AeroNewsJournal.com. Aero News Journal, September 2025. https://www.aeronewsjournal.com/2025/09/kaan-fifth-generation-fighter-boosts.html.

Defence Security Asia. “Turkey’s KAAN Fighter: Second Prototype Redesign Analysis.” Defence Security Asia. DefenceSecurityAsia.com, 2024. https://defencesecurityasia.com/en/turkeys-kaan-fighter-second-prototype-redesign-analysis/.

Atlantic Council. “Turkey’s Emerging and Disruptive Technologies Capacity and NATO Defense Policy: Prospects and Limitations.” Atlantic Council. Atlantic Council, 2023. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/issue-brief/turkeys-emerging-and-disruptive-technologies-capacity-and-nato-defense-policy-prospects-and-limitations/.

Bacik, Gökhan. “Risk, Leverage, and Autonomy: Turkey’s Options between the US, China, and the World.” Belfer Center. Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, 2024. https://www.belfercenter.org/research-analysis/risk-leverage-autonomy-turkeys-options-us-china-world.

Brookings Institution. “Turkey, Italy, and Europe’s Defense Industrial Future.” Brookings Institution. Brookings Institution, 2023. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/turkey-italy-and-europes-defense-industrial-future/.

Al Jazeera. “Here’s a Look at Türkiye’s Booming Defence Industry.” Al Jazeera. Al Jazeera Media Network, March 17, 2025. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/3/17/heres-a-look-at-turkiyes-booming-defence-industry.

Chatham House. “Iran War Reshapes Middle East: Turkey’s Regional Role Looks Set to Expand.” Chatham House. Chatham House, June 2026. https://www.chathamhouse.org/2026/06/iran-war-reshapes-middle-east-turkeys-regional-role-looks-set-expand.

AsiaNews. “From Drones to an ‘Islamic NATO’.” AsiaNews.it. AsiaNews, 2023. https://www.asianews.it/news-en/From-drones-to-an-Islamic-NATO.

The National. “Business Is Good: Turkish Arms Firms See Demand Surge on Back of Regional Conflict.” The National. Abu Dhabi Media, May 10, 2026. https://www.thenationalnews.com/news/mena/2026/05/10/business-is-good-turkish-arms-firms-see-demand-surge-on-back-of-regional-conflict/.

Gulf International Forum. “The Iran War Is Driving the Gulf toward Turkish Air Defense.” Gulf International Forum. Gulf International Forum, 2026. https://gulfif.org/the-iran-war-is-driving-the-gulf-toward-turkish-air-defense/.