Turkey to press allies for access to EU defence funds
By Tuvan Gumrukcu
ANKARA (Reuters) - Turkey will press European allies which plan to sharply ramp up their defence spending to ease restrictions that now require most of that money to be spent in the EU, Defence Minister Yasar Guler told Reuters on Wednesday ahead of a NATO meeting.
In written answers to questions from Reuters, Guler also said Turkey hopes a potential meeting between Donald Trump and Tayyip Erdogan will finally yield progress in lifting U.S. sanctions that expelled Turkey from the F-35 jet programme.
Guler said Turkey, which has the second biggest army in NATO after the United States, has advanced capabilities in areas such as drones, which would be valuable to its allies as they plan major new spending on defence.
"Allies need to spend not only more, but also smarter – and there is a need for more cooperation than ever before," Guler said when asked about Trump's call on the alliance to ramp up defence spending to target 5% of output.
Many European nations have announced plans for major increases in defence spending. The EU itself, driven by fears of a Russian attack and doubts about U.S. security commitments, has approved creating a 150 billion-euro ($170 billion) EU arms fund to boost the defence industry, labelled the SAFE scheme.
But it mandates that 65% of projects are funded by firms in the bloc, the broader European Economic Area, or Ukraine.
Guler said such restrictions would exclude non-EU countries like Turkey from Europe's defence and security architecture, which he said was "an issue that cannot be discussed only within the EU".
Turkey wants to "build the security of the future together" with the EU, and would continue to work with "open-minded and visionary European allies within or outside SAFE," he said, specifically listing drones, air defences, naval systems, armoured vehicles and land platforms, electronic warfare and radar systems, ammunition and rocket systems.
Greece, Turkey's longstanding adversary, has demanded Ankara lift a lift a 30-year old war threat over territorial waters to be permitted to access EU defence funds. Guler said such demands were a mistake, amounting to "involving multilateral platforms in bilateral disputes".
Ankara's defence cooperation with its NATO allies has been hampered in recent years by U.S. sanctions imposed over a Turkish decision to buy Russian S-400 air defence systems, which resulted in Turkey's expulsion from the U.S.-led F-35 programme as both a buyer and manufacturer of the advanced jets.
Erdogan has expressed confidence that Trump, with whom he has good personal ties, will find a solution that relieves Turkey's defence industry of the sanctions.
A potential meeting between Erdogan and Trump, and the close ties between them, can "breathe new life" into bilateral defence ties and help lift the sanctions, Guler said. Although Ankara would not give up the S-400s, lifting the sanctions would let it consider returning to the F-35 project, he said.
($1 = 0.8792 euros)
(Writing by Huseyin Hayatsever; Editing by Jonathan Spicer and Peter Graff)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
24 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Appeals court lets President Donald Trump keep control of National Guard troops deployed to Los Angeles
LOS ANGELES — An appeals court on Thursday allowed President Donald Trump to keep control of National Guard troops he deployed to Los Angeles following protests over immigration raids. The decision halts a ruling from a lower court judge who found Trump acted illegally when he activated the soldiers over opposition from California Gov. Gavin Newsom. The deployment was the first by a president of a state National Guard without the governor's permission since 1965. In its decision, a three-judge panel on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously concluded it was likely Trump lawfully exercised his authority in federalizing control of the guard. It said that while presidents don't have unfettered power to seize control of a state's guard, the Trump administration had presented enough evidence to show it had a defensible rationale for doing so, citing violent acts by protesters. 'The undisputed facts demonstrate that before the deployment of the National Guard, protesters 'pinned down' several federal officers and threw 'concrete chunks, bottles of liquid, and other objects' at the officers. Protesters also damaged federal buildings and caused the closure of at least one federal building. And a federal van was attacked by protesters who smashed in the van's windows,' the court wrote. 'The federal government's interest in preventing incidents like these is significant.' It also found that even if the federal government failed to notify the governor of California before federalizing the National Guard as required by law, Newsom had no power to veto the president's order. Trump celebrated the decision on his Truth Social platform, calling it a 'BIG WIN.' He wrote that 'all over the United States, if our Cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should State and Local Police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done.' Newsom issued a statement that expressed disappointment that the court is allowing Trump to retain control of the Guard. But he also welcomed one aspect of the decision. 'The court rightly rejected Trump's claim that he can do whatever he wants with the National Guard and not have to explain himself to a court,' Newsom said. 'The President is not a king and is not above the law. We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump's authoritarian use of U.S. military soldiers against citizens.' The court case could have wider implications on the president's power to deploy soldiers within the United States after Trump directed immigration officials to prioritize deportations from other Democratic-run cities. Trump, a Republican, argued that the troops were necessary to restore order. Newsom, a Democrat, said the move inflamed tensions, usurped local authority and wasted resources. The protests have since appeared to be winding down. Two judges on the appeals panel were appointed by Trump during his first term. During oral arguments Tuesday, all three judges suggested that presidents have wide latitude under the federal law at issue and that courts should be reluctant to step in. The case started when Newsom sued to block Trump's command, and he won an early victory from U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco. Breyer found that Trump had overstepped his legal authority, which he said only allows presidents can take control during times of 'rebellion or danger of a rebellion.' 'The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of 'rebellion,'' wrote Breyer, who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton and is brother to retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. The Trump administration, though, argued that courts can't second guess the president's decisions and quickly secured a temporary halt from the appeals court. The ruling means control of the California National Guard will stay in federal hands as the lawsuit continues to unfold.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
President Trump says he'll set unilateral tariff rates within weeks
US President Donald Trump told reporters on Wednesday that he would send letters to trading partners in the next week or two, outlining unilateral tariff rates. 'We're going to be sending letters out in about a week and a half, two weeks, to countries, telling them what the deal is,' Trump said at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington. 'At a certain point, we're just going to send letters out. And I think you understand that, saying this is the deal, you can take it or leave it,' he added. This would put Trump ahead of his tariff deadline, as the president previously paused so-called 'reciprocal' duties for 90 days until 8 July. The higher rates are set to kick in on the 9th. Trump told reporters at the Kennedy Center that a delay to the deadline is unlikely, although US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent previously suggested there may be some flexibility. "It is highly likely that those countries - or trading blocs as is the case with the EU - who are negotiating in good faith, we will roll the date forward to continue the good-faith negotiations," Bessent told the House Ways and Means Committee. "If someone is not negotiating, then we will not." Related EU targets Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' over tax provision in tariff talks US federal appeals court rules Trump tariffs may remain in effect while appeals process continues The US has thus far only managed to secure a trade framework with the UK, as well as clinching a tariff deal with China. Trump was nonetheless upbeat about negotiations on Wednesday. "We're rocking in terms of deals," he said. "We're dealing with quite a few countries and they all want to make a deal with us." Following talks in London, Trump said on Wednesday that magnets and rare earths would be supplied up front by China and that the US would allow Chinese students into its colleges and universities. The president added that a 55% tariff would be applied to Chinese imports. A White House official, who was not authorised to discuss the terms publicly, said the 55% was not an increase on the previous 30% tariff on China because Trump was including other pre-existing import taxes. Specifically, the president was tallying up his 10% baseline tariff, the 20% fentanyl trafficking levy and a 25% pre-existing tariff on China. In May, the US agreed upon a trade framework with the UK, which allows US goods to be fast-tracked through customs and reduces trade barriers on a number of products. The framework lowers US duties on British steel, aluminum and cars, although there are some knots to work out, meaning the specifics of the deal could arrive later than the 9 July deadline. US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said on Wednesday that a deal with the European Union will likely be among the final trade agreements concluded by the United States. 'I'm optimistic that we can get there with Europe. But Europe will be probably [at] the very, very end,' Lutnick told CNBC. In May, Trump threatened a 50% tariff on EU goods coming to the US, although he later said he would hold off on this threat until 9 July. The president originally placed a 20% so-called 'reciprocal' levy on EU goods, but this duty was lifted during the 90-day pause window. Sign in to access your portfolio
Wall Street Journal
31 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Oil Futures Diverge on U.S. Holiday Price Lag, Contract Expiration
Oil prices were mixed in European afternoon trade on Friday, with Brent crude down more than 2% to around $77 a barrel and West Texas Intermediate edging 0.7% higher to $74 a barrel. Brent futures fell after President Trump set a two-week deadline to decide whether the U.S. will strike Iran, easing fears of an imminent military intervention. The international oil benchmark had settled 2.8% higher on Thursday at $78.85, its highest close since January.
