Members of Congress are asking Secretary of State Marco Rubio for clear answers about the future of the fighter program and their overall strategy against it.
The intervention is manifested through a letter circulating in Congress to collect signatures. This prioritizes the need to clarify whether the recent public statements of the US ambassador to Turkey, Tom Barak, are in line with the official government line or if they undermine existing legislation.
The “thorn” of the S-400 and the conditions for the F-35
At the heart of the legislators’ concern is the possible rapprochement between Washington and Ankara on fifth-generation aircraft. The lawmakers point out that Congress has enacted strict post-purchase conditions for the Russian S-400s, which remain in full force.
In this context, the State Department is requested to clarify how CAATSA sanctions are applied and what specific steps Turkey must take before any question of its return to the program is raised.
It is recalled that the Turkish side has not yet satisfied the fundamental conditions, such as the complete removal of the Russian systems and the explicit commitment not to acquire similar equipment in the future.
Reactions to Barak’s references to Hezbollah
At the same time, the letter focuses on Mr. Barak’s controversial reports from the Diplomatic Forum of Antalya regarding the Middle East. The American ambassador had characterized the truce in Lebanon as fragile, supporting the need for political management and dialogue with Hezbollah, which, according to him, cannot be destroyed.
Lawmakers are deeply concerned that such statements appear to equate Israel with the terrorist organization, creating dangerous ambiguity about the US’s stance on critical issues of security and regional balances in the Eastern Mediterranean.
Request for a clear national strategy
In conclusion, the authors of the letter ask the head of American diplomacy to clarify whether there is any structural change in the country’s foreign policy. They emphasize that compliance with the law, the defense of NATO’s technological superiority and the stability of alliances in the region are non-negotiable priorities that cannot be misinterpreted by diplomatic representatives.
