Mr. President, I rise today in respect to S.J. Res. 60, which, as I understand it, will be up for vote here fairly quickly. And I rise in opposition to S.J. Res. 60. S.J. Res. 60, in essence, says that we would not keep the commitment that…
Mr. President, I rise today in respect to S.J. Res. 60, which, as I understand it, will be up for vote here fairly quickly. And I rise in opposition to S.J. Res. 60. S.J. Res. 60, in essence, says that we would not keep the commitment that we have made to sell or refurbish the F-16 jets to Turkiye.
I am not here to tell you that Turkiye is the best partner that we have had. Indeed, as former chairman and now ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee, I deal and have to deal with them regularly on a lot of issues. They are an ally in NATO. NATO, as we all know, is the strongest political and military alliance that has ever been created on the planet, and Turkiye is a member of that alliance.
To be honest with you--and I tell them this face-to-face--they are not acting like a partner; they are not acting like an ally, and there are a long list of complaints that we have in that regard.
This actually started with defense missiles that they wanted to buy, and we offered them the Patriot missiles, as we do to all of our NATO allies, and, indeed, instead, they chose to purchase Russian S-400 missiles.
At the same time, they had purchased, or were in the process of purchasing, four F-35 of ours--which everybody wants, understandably. But at the time that they bought the S-400s, I told them they can't have S-400s in the same country as F-35s. If they are going to do business with Russia, so be it, but there are consequences for that.
So as a result of that, I put a hold on the F-35s, and I was followed by the other three corners and that hold was successful and the F-35s have not been transferred to Turkiye. And that was the fight we had with them over the S-400s.
We have made them a number of reasonable offers to try to resolve this, but they have not accepted any of those offers, and the result of that is they still got the S-400s, and we still got the four F-35s, which are going to stay here until the S-400s leave the country.
So the next thing that happened was they came to us and said, well, their F-16s were aging. They needed to be refurbished, and they needed a number of new F-16s.
About that time, they decided to put a hold on Sweden and Finland entering NATO. And as we all know, Finland and Sweden really, really wanted to enter NATO shortly after the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, and everybody in NATO agreed with that, with the exception of Turkiye and Hungary.
Both used the accession to NATO by those two countries as a way to use leverage against other countries within NATO on some parochial disputes that they have. That is not the way you do business as an ally. When your allied, yes, you will always have issues that you have to deal with other allied countries, but you don't use the security of the whole. You don't use the good of the whole as a bargaining chip to try to get a leg up on those.
So the result of that was for a long, long time, Turkiye held up the accession of those two countries into NATO. As a result of that, I held up the F-16 purchases that they wanted to make.
Negotiations went on for a long time. We were made promise after promise. The promises were broken. But, finally, they did roll over earlier this year, late last year, and allowed the accession of both Sweden and Finland. The result of that was that we agreed that we would do what they wanted to do with the F-16s.
This particular resolution, the S.J. Res. 60, really undoes that agreement, and I can fully understand Senators being upset with Turkiye for this and a long list of other complaints that we have. But a deal is a deal and we made this agreement and they kept their side of the bargain--admittedly not very timely, but they did keep their side of the bargain. And now Finland is in, and Sweden is about to come in so that will be the state of play.
I would urge a ``no'' vote on this simply because it is imperative to the United States, when we give our word on something, that we keep our word, and so that is where we are.
Having said that, I have urged Turkiye on a number of occasions to examine their conscience and really think about what their commitment means to NATO. That commitment to NATO all the rest of us have is very, very strong, and Turkiye and Hungary have not been behaving the way the rest of us in the coalition behave.
One of the most troubling things to me is both of them hold hands with Putin under the table, and that is a very, very bad state of affairs as far as what is going on in Europe, as far as NATO's relationship with Russia, and just the overall situation.
So although we have a lot of things to complain about with Turkiye, on this particular occasion, I am going to urge that we defeat S.J. Res. 60 and actually keep the agreement that we made regarding the F- 16s.
I yield the floor.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to respond for up to 2 minutes, please.
Mr. President, first of all, I want the record to be absolutely clear. This is not a gift to Turkiye; this is a sale to Turkiye. They are going to pay for the munitions they are going to get, the aircraft they are going to get.
As I stated when I started out, Turkiye is very, very less than a desired or good ally in the current NATO framework, and certainly, as I said, we have a long list of complaints with them.
One thing I think that I would disagree with my good friend from Kentucky--the accession of Sweden and Finland to NATO was a huge, huge matter. It wasn't something that was just a parenthetical thought. It added 800 miles of direct border against Russia, which is what NATO was created to push back against. And the same thing with Sweden. Sweden has a very, very robust defense system itself.
With all due respect to my friend from Kentucky, I wouldn't put this in the vein or argument that we are going to come to the defense of Sweden. Sweden is going to come to the defense of NATO and in a very, very robust way.
Yes, we wanted them, and yes, that is exactly why I withheld the F-16 sale and refurbishment--so that we could get those two. It was extremely important.
Also, my good friend has reiterated some human rights violations that this country has. I would remind my good friend that Russia does the same thing. I have a resolution that came out of the Foreign Relations Committee that is on the floor that reiterates all those human rights and condemns Russia for those exact human rights things that my good friend reiterated, but he has a hold on it. There is one hold on that piece of legislation, and it is from the Senator from Kentucky, which I would respectfully request that he lift.
In any event, I am not here to defend Turkiye or the other things that they do. What I am here to do is to defend the importance of NATO, the importance of adding Finland and Sweden to NATO, and the fact that negotiations are the way these things get done.