Follow us on social

Rand Paul’s office moves to stop $23B sale of F-16s to Turkey

Rand Paul’s office moves to stop $23B sale of F-16s to Turkey

The administration approved the package after Ankara released its hold on Sweden NATO membership

Reporting | QiOSK

UPDATE 3/1: The motion to discharge Paul's resolution failed in the Senate last night by a vote of 13-79. Nine Democrats and four Republicans supported the measure.

"Unfortunately, history prepared us for Senator Paul’s joint resolution of disapproval to fail. Congress has never passed a joint resolution of disapproval to stop an arms sale in part because they would need a veto-proof majority in both chambers in order to override a presidential veto," Jonathan Ellis Allen, a research associate at the Cato Institute, told RS after the vote. "Absent a major change in arms sale policy that requires Congress to vote to approve – rather than disapprove – each sale, the president will continue to have the power to use weapons transfers as a tool of foreign policy with little oversight from Congress."



Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) plans to force a vote as early as today on a resolution that would prohibit the sale of F-16 fighter jets and other military supplies to Turkey — a $23 billion package that the Biden administration approved last month.

Paul’s opposition to the sale is a result of concerns over Ankara’s record of alleged human rights abuses domestically, and what Paul says is destabilizing and dangerous behavior in the Middle East and elsewhere in the world, as well as a pattern of acting against the rule of law and U.S. interests. The senator first introduced the resolution on February 7.

“Turkey’s President praised Hamas as a ‘liberation group,’ Turkey’s military fired at our troops in Syria, and Turkey’s police imprison those who dare to criticize the leader. That doesn’t sound like the actions of an ‘ally’ deserving of $23 billion worth of American firepower,” Paul said in a statement provided to RS.

As three scholars from the Cato Institute explained in an op-ed late last year, Washington has continued to send valuable aid to Turkey while simultaneously squandering any leverage it has in the relationship.

“The U.S. will continue to send weapons and security assistance to its NATO ally, in part with the hope that such reassurances and arms sales will provide the U.S. with leverage over Turkey,” wrote Jordan Cohen, Jonathan Ellis Allen, and Nardine Mosaad. “ Unfortunately, U.S. support for Turkey does the opposite of providing leverage and simultaneously hurts American security while destabilizing a region that Washington seems unable to ignore.”

The State Department announced the sale of $23 billion of 40 F-16s, along with the necessary tools to modernize its 79 fighter jets from its current fleet after 20 months of negotiations that centered around welcoming Sweden into NATO. While the Biden administration said in July 2023 that it would move forward with the sale following signals from Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan that he would approve Sweden’s membership, Congress demanded more concrete steps before they green-lighted the sale.

In January, Erdogan signed the documents that officially ratified Sweden’s NATO ascension — later that day, the State Department notified Congress that it had approved the sale.

The parliament in Hungary, the final holdout on Stockholm’s looming admittance to NATO, voted to approve their membership on Monday.

In the past, other senators have expressed concern over Erdogan’s authoritarian tendencies and Turkey’s foreign policy. “My approval of Turkey’s request to purchase F-16 aircraft has been contingent on Turkish approval of Sweden’s NATO membership. But make no mistake: This was not a decision I came to lightly,” Ben Cardin (D-Md.), the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in January.

“While Turkey plays a critical role in the region as a NATO ally, there is an urgent need for improvement on its human rights record, including the unjust imprisonment of journalists and civil society leaders, better cooperation on holding Russia accountable for its invasion of Ukraine, and on lowering the temperature in its rhetoric about the Middle East,” Cardin added.

Congress has never successfully used a joint resolution of disapproval to block a proposed arms sale. Passing such a measure would require getting through both chambers of Congress and securing a veto-proof majority in the Senate. Reporting from when the State Department announced the deal in January indicated that there was not sufficient support in Congress to block the deal.


U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) looks on during a U.S. Senate Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee Hearing, September 23, 2020. Alex Edelman/Pool via REUTERS
Reporting | QiOSK
Trump ASEAN
Top photo credit: U.S. President Donald Trump looks at Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., next to Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim when posing for a family photo with leaders at the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, October 26, 2025. Vincent Thian/Pool via REUTERS

‘America First’ meets ‘ASEAN Way’ in Kuala Lumpur

Asia-Pacific

The 2025 ASEAN and East Asia Summits in Kuala Lumpur beginning today are set to be consequential multilateral gatherings — defining not only ASEAN’s internal cohesion but also the shape of U.S.–China relations in the Indo-Pacific.

President Donald Trump’s participation will be the first by a U.S. president in an ASEAN-led summit since 2022. President Biden skipped the last two such summits in 2023 and 2024, sending then-Vice President Harris instead.

keep readingShow less
iran, china, russia
Top photo credit: Top image credit: Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi shake hands as Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu looks on during their meet with reporters after their meeting at Diaoyutai State Guest House on March 14, 2025 in Beijing, China. Lintao Zhang/Pool via REUTERS

'Annulled'! Russia won't abide snapback sanctions on Iran

Middle East

“A raider attack on the U.N. Security Council.” This was the explosive accusation leveled by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov this week. His target was the U.N. Secretariat and Western powers, whom he blamed for what Russia sees as an illegitimate attempt to restore the nuclear-related international sanctions on Iran.

Beyond the fiery rhetoric, Ryabkov’s statement contained a message: Russia, he said, now considers all pre-2015 U.N. sanctions on Iran, snapped back by the European signatories of the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) — the United Kingdom, France, Germany — “annulled.” Moscow will deepen its military-technical cooperation with Tehran accordingly, according to Ryabkov.

This is more than a diplomatic spat; it is the formal announcement of a split in international legal reality. The world’s major powers are now operating under two irreconcilable interpretations of international law. On one side, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany assert that the sanctions snapback mechanism of the JCPOA was legitimately triggered for Iran’s alleged violations. On the other, Iran, Russia, and China reject this as an illegitimate procedural act.

This schism was not inevitable, and its origin reveals a profound incongruence. The Western powers that most frequently appeal to the sanctity of the "rules-based international order" and international law have, in this instance, taken an action whose effects fundamentally undermine it. By pushing through a legal maneuver that a significant part of the Security Council considers illegitimate, they have ushered the world into a new and more dangerous state. The predictable, if imperfect, framework of universally recognized Security Council decisions is being replaced by a system where legal facts are determined by political interests espoused by competing power blocs.

This rupture followed a deliberate Western choice to reject compromises in a stand-off with Iran. While Iran was in a technical violation of the provisions of the JCPOA — by, notably, amassing a stockpile of highly enriched uranium (up to 60% as opposed to the 3.67% for a civilian use permissible under the JCPOA), there was a chance to avert the crisis. In the critical weeks leading to the snapback, Iran had signaled concessions in talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Cairo, in terms of renewing cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog’s inspectors.

keep readingShow less
On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants
Top Photo Credit: (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants

Europe

While diplomats labored to produce the Dayton Accords in 1995, then-Secretary of Defense Bill Perry advised, “No agreement is better than a bad agreement.” Given that Washington’s allies in London, Paris, Berlin and Warsaw are opposed to any outcome that might end the war in Ukraine, no agreement may be preferable. But for President Trump, there is no point in equating the illusion of peace in Ukraine with a meaningless ceasefire that settles nothing.

Today, Ukraine is mired in corruption, starting at the very highest levels of the administration in Kyiv. Sending $175 billion of borrowed money there "for however long it takes" has turned out to be worse than reckless. The U.S. national sovereign debt is surging to nearly $38 trillion and rising by $425 billion with each passing month. President Trump needs to turn his attention away from funding Joe Biden’s wars and instead focus on the faltering American economy.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.